Callaway v. State
202 So. 3d 901
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Defendant Michael Anthony Callaway pled guilty to two counts of armed robbery with a firearm (January 26, 2014) pursuant to a negotiated plea admitting probation violations and receiving concurrent 15-year sentences with 10-year minimum mandatories and five years probation.
- Callaway moved to vacate his plea and sentence as a Habitual Violent Felony Offender, asserting three ineffective-assistance-of-counsel (IAC) claims: (1) failure to depose witnesses about identification issues; (2) failure to request a competency evaluation; and (3) counsel’s waiver of a presentence investigation (PSI) without Callaway’s knowledge.
- At a pre-plea Arthur hearing, defense counsel argued weaknesses in eyewitness identification; the judge found the identification reliable (photographic lineup ID; victim described tattoos during prosecutor interview) and denied relief.
- Plea negotiation offered a substantially better outcome than the likely exposure at trial (potential consecutive life terms and substantial Broward probation-violation exposure), which Callaway accepted.
- The record (Arthur hearing transcript and plea colloquy) reflected Callaway’s comprehension and responsiveness; he asked questions, corrected the court on prior sentence information, and demonstrated understanding of rights and consequences.
- The trial court denied Callaway’s motion; the appellate court affirmed, finding no demonstration of prejudice under Strickland.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Failure to depose witnesses | Callaway: counsel should have deposed victims to challenge identification and would have affected plea decision | State: identification issues were known pre-plea (Arthur hearing); no new facts would have arisen from depositions; plea was knowingly advantageous | Denied — failure to depose, without particularized harm, does not establish IAC or prejudice |
| Failure to request competency evaluation | Callaway: counsel should have ordered psychological evaluation before plea | State: record shows Callaway understood proceedings and could consult with counsel; no reasonable probability an evaluation would show incompetence | Denied — no substantial doubt of competency; no Strickland prejudice shown |
| Waiver of presentence investigation report (PSI) | Callaway: counsel waived PSI without his knowledge, harming sentencing | State: defendant not entitled to PSI as non-first-time felon; Callaway admitted HVFO status and plea was negotiated sentencing; no prejudice shown from absence of PSI | Denied — no entitlement to PSI and no prejudice from waiver |
| Overall IAC claim standard | Callaway: cumulative counsel errors warrant vacatur | State: Strickland requires specific deficient performance and prejudice; record disproves prejudice | Denied — appellate court affirms because defendant failed to show but-for prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two-prong ineffective assistance standard requiring deficient performance and prejudice)
- Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (applies Strickland to guilty-plea advice; requires showing that counsel's errors affected plea outcome)
- State v. Arthur, 390 So. 2d 717 (Fla. 1980) (procedures for pretrial hearing on identification reliability)
- Magill v. State, 457 So. 2d 1367 (failure to depose witnesses alone is insufficient to prove IAC)
- Brown v. State, 846 So. 2d 1114 (defendant alleging failure to depose must show particularized harm on evidentiary issue)
- Davis v. State, 928 So. 2d 1089 (IAC claim fails when defendant cannot articulate unknown testimonial evidence from depositions)
- Kennedy v. State, 547 So. 2d 912 (defendant must show result would have been different but for counsel's errors)
- Zerquera v. State, 583 So. 2d 348 (illustrates burden to show prejudice in IAC claims)
- Alexander v. Dugger, 841 F.2d 371 (competency-evaluation prejudice standard: reasonable probability evaluation would show incompetence)
- Lamarca v. State, 931 So. 2d 838 (no IAC for failing to move for competency where record shows defendant could consult and understand proceedings)
- Adams v. Wainwright, 764 F.2d 1356 (evidentiary hearing on competency requires real, substantial, legitimate doubt)
- Bruce v. Estelle, 483 F.2d 1031 (test for when facts clearly generate legitimate doubt about competency)