Edwin Arvelo v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, 687 F. App'x 901

On Aug. 16, 2006, Edwin Arvelo abducted Carol Bergeron from a parking garage; coworkers called police and Arvelo fled. He was later arrested and waived Miranda rights during a custodial interrogation.
During the ~3-hour interview (with a 40-minute break), Arvelo—age 21, GED, employed—admitted he forced Bergeron into his car intending to have sex; no witnesses reported sexual touching or threats. The confession was the primary evidence supporting charges including kidnapping with intent to commit sexual battery.
Arvelo pleaded nolo contendere to multiple serious charges and received a 60-year sentence; his counsel did not move to suppress the confession before the plea.
Arvelo pursued state and then federal habeas relief arguing ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to move to suppress; this Court previously remanded for an evidentiary hearing, which the district court held.
After the hearing (testimony from Arvelo, his trial counsel, and the prosecutor; interrogation transcript and audio admitted), the district court again denied relief; Arvelo obtained a COA on whether counsel was ineffective for not moving to suppress the confession prior to the plea.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Arvelo)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to move to suppress Arvelo’s confession before advising plea	Trial counsel should have moved to suppress because confession was involuntary (promises of help/leniency, intoxication, mental illness, emotional state)	Confession was voluntary, Miranda was waived, offers of help were non-specific and not promises of leniency, intoxication/mental state did not impair comprehension	Denied — no prejudice under Strickland because a suppression motion would have failed and thus would not have altered the plea decision

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishing two-prong ineffective-assistance test: performance and prejudice)
Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (prejudice inquiry for ineffective-assistance claims in the plea context)
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (Miranda warnings and waiver framework)
Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157 (confession involuntariness requires coercive police activity)
Arvelo v. Sec’y, Fla. Dep’t of Corr., 788 F.3d 1345 (11th Cir. 2015) (prior remand holding ineffective-assistance claim not waived by plea)
Ward v. Hall, 592 F.3d 1144 (11th Cir. standard of review for Strickland on habeas)
United States v. Jones, 32 F.3d 1512 (two-part inquiry for confession admissibility: Miranda compliance and voluntariness)
United States v. Farley, 607 F.3d 1294 (review standards for voluntariness and underlying factual findings)