McNeal v. State, 82-59
| Decision Date | 10 February 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 82-59,82-59 |
| Citation | 409 So.2d 528 |
| Parties | Willie Lee McNEAL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Willie Lee McNeal, pro se.
No appearance for appellee.
In his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for postconviction relief appellant claimed the denial of his constitutional right to the effective assistance of counsel during his trial for the capital crime of first degree murder because his counsel, in summation to the jury, argued that, at most and at best, the one and only logical result of the State's evidence was proof of manslaughter. The jury rejected this argument and convicted appellant of first degree murder, which conviction was affirmed on appeal. Now appellant turns on his trial counsel, citing federal cases and cases from other states where courts have from hindsight second-guessed counsel's judgment and unsuccessful trial strategy and declared that in doing or not doing some act, defense counsel abdicated his function and his client's cause. We do not think courts should review any specific discretionary or judgmental act or position of trial counsel, whether tactical or strategic, on an inquiry as to effectiveness of counsel. See Baker v. State, 404 So.2d 1151 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Ferby v. State, 404 So.2d 407 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Brown v. State, 404 So.2d 157 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Ables v. State, 404 So.2d 137 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981).
When faced with the duty of attempting to avoid the consequences of overwhelming evidence of the commission of an atrocious crime, such as a deliberate, considered killing without the remotest legal justification or excuse, it is commonly considered a good trial strategy for a defense counsel to make some halfway concessions to the truth in order to give the appearance of reasonableness and candor and to thereby gain credibility and jury acceptance of some more important position. To be effectual, trial counsel should be able to do this without express approval of his client 1 and without risk of being branded as being professionally ineffective because others may have different judgment or less experience.
AFFIRMED.
1 A trial is always a matter of calculated risks-the lawyer makes the calculations-the client takes the risks.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Knight v. Dugger
...in trial counsel's not objecting to the prosecutor's remarks. See generally Washington v. State, 397 So.2d 285 (Fla.1981); McNeal v. State, 409 So.2d 528 (Fla. 5th DCA, rehearing denied, 413 So.2d 876 (Fla.1982); Ferby v. State, 404 So.2d 407 (Fla. 5th DCA Muhammad v. State, 426 So.2d 533, ......
-
Griffin v. McNeil
...good trial strategy to concede guilt as to some of the charged offenses to gain credibility with the jury. McNeal v. State, 409 So.2d 528, 529 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). Therefore, Kassier was not ineffective for conceding that Griffin shot and killed Officer Martin. No evidentiary hearing is nec......
-
Lewis v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr.
...ground for relief. Resp. Ex. AA at 12-16. The circuit court denied this claim, reasoning:Here, the State's citing McNeal v. State, 409 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982) is well placed. In McNeal, a Fifth DCA case, the Court found that Courts should not review any specific discretionary or judg......
-
Atwater v. State
...even without Atwater's knowledge or consent, in accord with McNeal v. Wainwright, 722 F.2d 674 (11th Cir.1984), and McNeal v. State, 409 So.2d 528 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). At the evidentiary hearing below, defense co-counsel White testified that as an experienced attorney of seventeen years wit......