McCrae v. State
| Decision Date | 27 May 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 74--1585,74--1585 |
| Citation | 313 So.2d 429 |
| Parties | Eva Mae McCRAE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, and Gerald Hubbart, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and J. Robert Olian, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before PEARSON, HENDRY and HAVERFIELD, JJ.
This is an appeal by the defendant from the denial of a RCrP 3.850 post-conviction motion and also a motion in mitigation of sentence.
Appellant was convicted of second degree murder of her husband. This court affirmed the conviction on appeal. McCrae v. State, Fla.App.1974, 291 So.2d 17, cert. denied 300 So.2d 267 (Fla.1974).
Thereafter, she filed her motion to vacate the judgment and to have a new trial and her motion to mitigate a sentence of twenty years imprisonment. An evidentiary hearing was held, and the trial court denied appellant's motion.
As her sole point on appeal, appellant submits that the motion should be granted because she was denied effective assistance of counsel during her original trial where the record reflects that there were four witnesses who might have been called on her behalf, but who were not, because her trial counsel was not prepared.
Appellant's trial counsel was not called as a witness at the hearing below, and her conclusion that he was unprepared appears to be her own subjective opinion based on hindsight.
Also, the record reflects that two of the four witnesses actually were called to testify about matters contained in a presentence investigation report which is not really relevant to the issue of alleged incompetent counsel.
The other two witnesses, social workers at Jackson Memorial Hospital, essentially testified that Mrs. McCrea's husband knew he was suffering from cancer, which depressed him, and also that the appellant was concerned about his condition.
Appellant thus concludes that these witnesses could support her defense that she was attempting to prevent her husband from committing suicide when the gun discharged and killed him.
Appellant concedes that the test generally employed in Florida in determining whether or not a defendant has received reasonably effective counsel is whether the facts alleged demonstrate that the trial was a mockery or a farce. Parker v. State, Fla.App.1974, 295 So.2d 312; see also, West v. State of Louisiana, 478 F.2d 1026 (5th Cir. 1973).
We do not think the absence...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Garmise
...of the defendant's criminal conviction under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850. Jackson v. State, 353 So.2d 940 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); McCrae v. State, 313 So.2d 429 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Parker v. State, 295 So.2d 312 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974); Potts v. State, 242 So.2d 729 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971); Meinsen v. State, 24......
-
Gibson v. State
...must be such that the trial was reduced to a mockery or a sham. Parker v. State, 295 So.2d 312 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974); McCrae v. State, 313 So.2d 429 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Biggs v. United States, 318 F.Supp. 212 (N.D.Fla.1970). There is nothing in the record to support such a finding by this cou......
-
Roth v. State, 85-2455
...Halpin v. State, 428 So.2d 703 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). See also McMillian v. State, 411 So.2d 1372 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). Cf. McCrae v. State, 313 So.2d 429 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975) (affirming the denial of a Rule 3.850 motion after an evidentiary hearing in which the claim of ineffective assistance of......
-
Turnquist v. State, 75-1111
...284 So.2d 239; McCleney v. State, Fla.App.1974, 304 So.2d 459; Flewellyn v. State, Fla.App.1975, 308 So.2d 46; McCrae v. State, Fla.App.1975, 313 So.2d 429; Wilkinson v. State, Fla.App.1975, 322 So.2d ...