Joseph Allen Mays v. State of Florida
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledOctober 15, 2021
Docket2D21-0801
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
JOSEPH ALLEN MAYS,
Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
No. 2D21-801
October 15, 2021
Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit
Court for Pinellas County; Susan St. John, Judge.
Joseph Allen Mays, pro se.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Suzanne C.
Bechard, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Joseph Allen Mays appeals the order summarily denying his
motion filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We
affirm without comment the summary denial of all but one of Mr.
Mays' claims. We reverse and remand the portion of the order that
summarily denies ground two.
In ground two, Mr. Mays asserted that trial counsel was
ineffective for failing to investigate his competency and move for a
competency hearing. He argued that at the time of his trial he was
suffering from various mental illnesses, including bipolar disorder,
multiple personality disorder, schizophrenia, and that he was
suffering from delusions and hallucinations and hearing voices. He
claimed counsel knew he had been under psychiatric care prior to
trial, had attempted suicide multiple times, and was a depressive
alcoholic. He further argued that counsel's failure to determine his
competency prior to trial violated his due process right to not to be
tried while incompetent and prejudiced him because he was unable
to assist counsel at trial. Had a hearing been held, Mr. Mays
claimed, he would have been declared incompetent.
Mr. Mays' allegations are facially sufficient and are not
conclusively refuted by the record excerpts of interviews presented
at trial attached to the order by the postconviction court. See Houle
v. State, 74 So. 3d 143, 144 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011); see also Perez v.
State, 306 So. 3d 126, 128, 129-30 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018).
2
Accordingly, we reverse the portion of the postconviction court's
order summarily denying ground two and remand for the
postconviction court to either attach the portions of the record that
conclusively refute ground two or to hold an evidentiary hearing on
the narrow claim that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to
investigate Mr. Mays' competency and move for a competency
determination.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded.
SILBERMAN, KELLY, and LUCAS JJ., Concur.
Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
3