Ferguson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Ferguson v. State

128 So. 3d 136, 2013 WL 5762039, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 17030

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 25, 2013

DocketNo. 5D12-4662

StatusPublished

This text of 128 So. 3d 136 (Ferguson v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ferguson v. State, 128 So. 3d 136, 2013 WL 5762039, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 17030 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

COHEN, J.

William Ferguson appeals from the order denying his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Ferguson was convicted of numerous sex offenses against his stepchildren. His rule 3.850 motion raised seven claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The trial court summarily denied six of those claims and denied the remaining claim following an evidentia-ry hearing. We affirm the trial court’s denial of claims one, two, three, five, six, and seven. However, we reverse the trial court’s summary denial of Ferguson’s fourth claim regarding trial counsel’s failure to request a jury instruction on the lesser-included offense of unnatural and lascivious act. We remand for an eviden-tiary hearing on that claim.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED.

PALMER and WALLIS, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

COHEN, J.

William Ferguson appeals from the order denying his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Ferguson was convicted of numerous sex offenses against his stepchildren. His rule 3.850 motion raised seven claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The trial court summarily denied six of those claims and denied the remaining claim following an evidentia-ry hearing. We affirm the trial court’s denial of claims one, two, three, five, six, and seven. However, we reverse the trial court’s summary denial of Ferguson’s fourth claim regarding trial counsel’s failure to request a jury instruction on the lesser-included offense of unnatural and lascivious act. We remand for an eviden-tiary hearing on that claim.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED.

PALMER and WALLIS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

128 So. 3d 136, 2013 WL 5762039, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 17030, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ferguson-v-state-fladistctapp-2013.