Sophia L. Lamb v. State
202 So. 3d 118
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Lamb was convicted after jury trial of first-degree murder (with firearm), burglary with a firearm, robbery with a firearm, and three counts of aggravated assault; she received concurrent life sentences and shorter terms on assaults.
- Lamb filed a sworn Rule 3.850 postconviction motion alleging six claims; the court summarily denied all claims and this appeal followed; the court previously affirmed convictions and sentences.
- Claim six alleged the State offered Lamb a plea to manslaughter with a 15-year agreed sentence, which she says counsel advised her to reject by promising an acquittal because there was no physical evidence linking her to the crime.
- Lamb alleged she rejected the plea solely on counsel’s advice, would have accepted but for that advice, and was prejudiced by receiving life sentences at trial.
- The postconviction court denied claim six, finding (1) Lamb’s colloquy showed her rejection was knowing and voluntary after consultation with counsel, and (2) counsel’s belief he could win at trial, without more, is legally insufficient to show ineffective assistance.
- The appellate court held claim six was facially insufficient but remanded to give Lamb 60 days to amend because the pleading defect may be curable and she had not been given leave to amend; if amended and still denied, further records or an evidentiary hearing may be required.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel’s alleged promise to secure an acquittal that caused rejection of a plea can support a 3.850 claim for ineffective assistance | Lamb: Counsel advised her to reject a 15-year manslaughter plea by promising she would be acquitted; but for that advice she would have accepted the plea and been prejudiced | State: Rejection was voluntary after consultation; mere advice that counsel could win at trial is legally insufficient absent specific deficiencies | Court: Claim is facially insufficient (lacks specifics like failure to investigate or unreasonable assessment) but remand to permit amendment because defect may be curable |
| Whether the trial-court colloquy conclusively refutes Lamb’s allegation that she rejected the plea because of counsel’s promise | Lamb: Colloquy does not conclusively disprove that counsel promised acquittal | State: Colloquy shows rejection was knowing, voluntary, and after consultation | Court: Colloquy did not conclusively refute the allegation; additional records or an evidentiary hearing may be required on remand |
| Whether summary denial without leave to amend was proper for a facially insufficient 3.850 claim | Lamb: Entitled to chance to amend a deficient pleading | State: Summary denial appropriate given facial insufficiency | Court: Where defect may be corrected, defendant must be given at least one opportunity to amend; remand for 60-day leave to amend |
| Standard for denial on the record without evidentiary hearing | Lamb: If denial relies on record, the record must conclusively refute claim | State: Transcript support justified summary denial | Court: If the record does not conclusively refute amended claim, the court must either attach additional records to support denial or hold an evidentiary hearing |
Key Cases Cited
- Alcorn v. State, 121 So.3d 419 (Fla. 2013) (plea-offer prejudice standard and related principles)
- Morgan v. State, 991 So.2d 835 (Fla. 2008) (ineffective-assistance claim for rejecting plea is facially insufficient absent specific factual allegations of counsel deficiency)
- Foster v. State, 810 So.2d 910 (Fla. 2002) (summary denial of 3.850 claims requires claims be facially invalid or conclusively refuted by record)
- Peede v. State, 748 So.2d 253 (Fla. 1999) (same principle on summary denials)
- Colon v. State, 909 So.2d 484 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (misinformation by counsel inducing rejection of plea can be actionable ineffective assistance)
- Millan v. State, 55 So.3d 694 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (statement that counsel’s belief he could win does not alone establish deficient performance)
- Steel v. State, 684 So.2d 290 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (counsel misinformation causing rejection of plea can be actionable)
- Spera v. State, 971 So.2d 754 (Fla. 2007) (leave to amend pleading defects in postconviction motions)
- Luckey v. State, 979 So.2d 353 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (defendant should be given opportunity to correct legally insufficient 3.850 motion)
- Prevost v. State, 972 So.2d 274 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (procedure if defendant fails to amend: final denial with prejudice)
- Shere v. State, 742 So.2d 215 (Fla. 1999) (trial judge’s role at 3.850 evidentiary hearing: credibility and factual findings)