322 So.3d 15
Fla.2020Background:
- Victim Erick Joel Colon was found shot in the head on Sept. 10, 2008; his cell phone and wallet were missing.
- Sanchez-Torres’s sister found the victim’s phone; the family destroyed parts of it and detectives later recovered pieces.
- Sanchez-Torres gave both a handwritten statement admitting the shooting and later told detectives a codefendant (Markeil Thomas) was the shooter; he pled guilty to armed robbery and first-degree murder and waived a penalty-phase jury.
- The trial court found two aggravators (prior violent felony and commission during robbery), found 22 mitigators (low weight), and imposed death; this Court affirmed on direct appeal.
- Sanchez-Torres filed a third-amended Rule 3.851 motion alleging multiple ineffective-assistance claims (including advice to plead and waive a jury, and failure to move to suppress the confession); an evidentiary hearing was held and the postconviction court denied/dismissed claims.
- Sanchez-Torres also filed a habeas petition alleging appellate counsel was ineffective for not raising novel grand-jury and "presumption-of-life"/jury-waiver arguments; the Court considered both the postconviction appeal and the habeas petition.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Counsel misadvised Sanchez-Torres to plead guilty and waive a penalty-phase jury | Counsel pressured or misinformed him; plea and waiver were not knowing, intelligent, and voluntary | Counsel strategically advised plea/waiver based on likelihood of conviction, jury behavior, and to pursue mitigation before the judge | Denied — counsel’s advice was a reasonable strategic choice supported by record and not shown to be result of misinformation or lack of preparation |
| Counsel failed to file a motion to suppress confession | Confession was coerced by detectives who threatened to arrest his mother/sister; suppression would have succeeded | No coercive police conduct toward Sanchez-Torres; threats to third parties were justified by probable cause; suppression motion would be meritless | Denied — totality of circumstances did not show involuntariness; motion would not have succeeded, so no deficient performance or prejudice |
| Habeas: appellate counsel ineffective for not arguing grand jury must find aggravators before State seeks death | Prosecutors improperly sought death without grand jury findings of aggravators; appellate counsel should have raised this novel juror/grand-jury-rights claim | The argument is novel and not established as meritorious in Florida; appellate counsel not ineffective for omitting novel issues | Denied — failure to raise novel legal theories is not ineffective assistance of appellate counsel |
| Habeas: appellate counsel ineffective for not arguing a "presumption-of-life" instruction / failing to challenge plea/jury-waiver on that ground | Appellate counsel should have argued a presumption-of-life instruction and that plea/jury-waiver were involuntary for lacking such explanation | The presumption-of-life claim is novel; appellate counsel did challenge voluntariness and may only raise trial-counsel ineffectiveness on direct appeal if apparent on record | Denied — novel instruction claim meritless; appellate counsel not ineffective for not raising nonmeritorious or non-apparent claims |
Key Cases Cited
- Sanchez-Torres v. State, 130 So. 3d 661 (Fla. 2013) (direct-appeal opinion summarized facts and affirmed convictions and sentence)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel: deficient performance and prejudice)
- Freeman v. State, 761 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 2000) (issues raised on direct appeal cannot be relitigated as ineffective assistance)
- Long v. State, 183 So. 3d 342 (Fla. 2016) (plea-context application of Strickland; defendant must show reasonable probability he would have gone to trial)
- Brown v. State, 846 So. 2d 1114 (Fla. 2003) (deference to counsel’s strategic decisions on collateral attack)
- Lebron v. State, 135 So. 3d 1040 (Fla. 2014) (failure to file suppression motion requires showing it would have succeeded and caused prejudice)
- Owen v. State, 862 So. 2d 687 (Fla. 2003) (confession voluntariness depends on totality of circumstances)
- Steinhorst v. Wainwright, 477 So. 2d 537 (Fla. 1985) (appellate counsel not ineffective for failing to present novel legal arguments)