Opinion ID: 77304
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Counsel's Failure to Raise Faretta Claim

Text: 31 Gamble argues that his counsel was unconstitutionally ineffective in failing to raise the Faretta issue just discussed. To succeed on this claim, Gamble must show that his attorney's performance was deficient and that the deficiency was prejudicial. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). The Florida Supreme Court found neither element in the present case. Because Gamble's substantive Faretta argument itself fails, the Court reasoned that Gamble cannot demonstrate that failure of appellate counsel to raise [the] issue undermined confidence in the outcome of the appeal. Gamble, 877 So.2d at 719. We agree. This Court has no cause to question the Florida Supreme Court's determination that, under the state's own laws, Gamble never asked to represent himself. 4 Nor does federal law require such an interpretation, for the reasons explained in the previous section. Therefore we do not find that the Florida Supreme Court's determination was contrary to, or was an unreasonable application of, United States Supreme Court precedent— including Strickland. 32