Inchierchiere v. State

214 So. 3d 690, 2017 WL 1174763, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 4186
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 29, 2017·No. No. 4D16-4141·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Affirmed. As to the claim that counsel failed to file a timely motion to disqualify the trial judge, claims of ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel do not present a valid claim, as there is no constitutional right to collateral counsel. Zack v. State, 911 So.2d 1190, 1203 (Fla. 2005). Further, appellant wanted to disqualify the judge from ruling on a motion to mitigate a sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(c). A rule 3.800(c) motion is a collateral proceeding, “not a de novo proceeding complete ‘with the full array of due process rights.’” Fox v. State, 166 So.3d 894, 896 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (quoting St. Lawrence v. State, 785 So.2d 728, 729-30 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)). Thus, his claim against collateral counsel is not cognizable. Zack, 911 So.2d at 1203. Appellant’s remaining claims are conclusively refuted by the record.

Warner, Taylor and May, JJ., concur.

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

Inchierchiere v. State, 214 So. 3d 690, 2017 WL 1174763, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 4186 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).

214 So. 3d 690 (Inchierchiere v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

St. Lawrence v. State
785 So. 2d 728 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)
Zack v. State
30 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 591 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2005)
Mitchell E. Fox v. State of Florida
166 So. 3d 894 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2015)