Griffith v. Gibson
4:21-cv-10032
S.D. Fla.Jun 1, 2021Background:
- Plaintiff Kenneth J. Griffith, a pretrial detainee proceeding pro se, sued his former attorney Patricia Gibson alleging she lied repeatedly and withheld evidence before withdrawing from his criminal case.
- Allegations include promises to file motions, provide discovery, possession of bodycam/recordings, waiving his appearance at hearings, and withholding an FWC incident report for 10 months.
- Plaintiff sought relief including an order compelling transcripts and $25,000 compensatory and $75,000 punitive damages.
- Plaintiff filed a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis; the complaint was screened under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
- The magistrate judge found the complaint frivolous and failing to state a claim: ineffective-assistance claims are premature pre-conviction, and Florida legal-malpractice claims require appellate or postconviction relief.
- Recommendation: dismiss the Complaint with prejudice and deny the IFP motion as moot.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the complaint is frivolous or fails to state a claim under § 1915(e)(2)(B) | Griffith alleges repeated lies and withheld evidence by Gibson warrant relief and damages | No controlling defense briefing noted; court applied governing law to pleadings | Complaint is frivolous and fails to state a claim; dismissal recommended with prejudice |
| Whether an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim is ripe pre-conviction | Griffith contends counsel’s conduct satisfied ineffective assistance | N/A (court applied precedent on ripeness) | Ineffective-assistance claim is premature before trial/conviction; cannot proceed now |
| Whether a legal-malpractice claim against criminal defense counsel can proceed without appellate/postconviction relief | Griffith seeks malpractice-type relief for counsel’s alleged failures | N/A (court applied Florida malpractice rule) | Florida law requires appellate or postconviction relief before malpractice claim; claim fails as matter of law |
| Disposition of IFP motion | Griffith seeks IFP to avoid filing fee | N/A | IFP motion denied as moot following recommended dismissal |
Key Cases Cited
- Bilal v. Driver, 251 F.3d 1346 (standard for frivolous claims under § 1915)
- Battle v. Central State Hospital, 898 F.2d 126 (definition of frivolous pleadings)
- Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319 (authority to dismiss baseless factual allegations)
- Miller v. Donald, 541 F.3d 1091 (pro se pleadings receive liberal construction)
- Steele v. Kehoe, 747 So.2d 931 (Florida rule requiring appellate or postconviction relief before malpractice claim in criminal cases)
- Garcia v. Diaz, [citation="752 F. App'x 927"] (applies Florida malpractice prerequisite in federal context)
- Carmichael, 372 F. Supp. 2d 1331 (ineffective-assistance claims barred pre-conviction)