Michael J. Giles v. State of Florida
16-2665
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Nov 19, 2017Background
- Michael J. Giles was convicted (jury) of aggravated battery with a deadly weapon after a fraternity brawl; jury found he discharged a firearm and caused great bodily harm.
- Giles’s sole defense at trial was self-defense; he admitted firing but claimed it was defensive.
- A recorded post-arrest police interview in which Giles denied involvement existed but was not played until the State sought to introduce it in rebuttal late in trial.
- The trial court allowed the State to play the recorded interview in rebuttal, refused to allow surrebuttal, and offered Giles a narrow, immediate opportunity to testify before the tape was played.
- Defense counsel repeatedly asked the court for time to consult with Giles (and for Giles’s father to approach), but the court denied further delay; counsel did not confer with Giles and Giles declined to testify.
- Giles moved for postconviction relief alleging ineffective assistance for counsel’s failure to advise him or secure time to consult before deciding whether to testify; the trial court denied relief and the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Giles) | Defendant's Argument (State / Trial Counsel) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel was ineffective for advising/allowing Giles not to testify when the court gave only an immediate opportunity to testify before rebuttal tape | Counsel failed to secure time to consult with Giles and thus allowed an uninformed waiver of the right to testify; prejudice likely because testimony could have changed outcome | Counsel did not advise Giles because there was no time; counsel repeatedly sought delay; failing to make futile objections is not ineffective | Affirmed: Giles failed to show objectively deficient performance under Strickland; record shows counsel sought time and did not have an opportunity to confer |
| Whether counsel had a duty to lodge a formal objection when the court denied time to consult | Giles: counsel should have formally objected and insisted on time to consult | State: formal objection would have been futile given the court’s stance; counsel’s actions were reasonable | Held: No relief—counsel not ineffective for failing to make futile objections |
| Whether any trial-court error in denying time is a basis for collateral relief | Giles: the pressure to decide immediately was error that affected counsel’s performance and access to testimony | State: any court error should have been raised on direct appeal; cannot be remedied in postconviction without showing counsel was deficient | Held: Court notes potential trial error should have been raised on direct appeal; on postconviction Giles did not meet Strickland |
| Whether prejudice exists (reasonable probability of different outcome if Giles testified) | Giles: absent counsel’s failures, reasonable probability that testimony would have created reasonable doubt and altered result | State: without showing counsel was deficient, prejudice prong not reached; outcome not altered under record | Held: Prejudice not established because deficiency not shown; relief denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two-prong ineffective-assistance test for deficiency and prejudice)
- Johnson v. State, 104 So. 3d 1010 (Fla. 2012) (discusses objective standard of reasonableness for counsel performance)
- Hartley v. State, 206 So. 3d 836 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (counsel not required to make futile objections)
- Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492 (describes instruction to a deadlocked jury; referenced regarding jury pressure)