Mr. Hornsby you previously stated:
Please don't get me started on appellate issues!!!!
"Unless this case results in a plea (which would require a waiver of appellate claims), I would bet my last dollar that an appellate court would reverse this case - if not on direct appeal, on collateral appeal for ineffective assistance of counsel (Google Rule 3.850 Motion)".
Clearly no one knows how the Black Robes will rule, but meerly being an average attorney is not enough.
394 So.2d 997 (1981) Thomas KNIGHT, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.
We adopt the following four principles as a standard to determine whether an attorney has provided reasonably effective assistance of counsel to his client.
First, the specific omission or overt act upon which the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is based must be detailed in the appropriate pleading.
Second, the defendant has the burden to show that this specific omission or overt act was a substantial and serious deficiency measurably below that of competent counsel. To be `below average' is not enough, for that is self evidently the case half the time. The standard of shortfall is necessarily subjective, but it cannot be established merely by showing that counsel's acts or omissions deviated from a checklist of standards."
Third, the defendant has the burden to show that this specific, serious deficiency, when considered under the circumstances of the individual case, was substantial enough to demonstrate a prejudice to the defendant to the extent that there is a likelihood that the deficient conduct affected the een this standardoutcome of the court proceedings.
Fourth, in the event a defendant does show a substantial deficiency and presents a prima facie showing of prejudice, the state still has an opportunity to rebut these assertions by showing beyond a reasonable doubt that there was no prejudice in fact.
Given this standard, what would you cite as a reversible error made by the defense to date.
