Opinion ID: 1882486
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 40

Heading: mr muhammad's re-sentencing counsel was laboring under an actual conflict of interest resulting in prejudice to mr. muhammad and in violation of his rights to the united states constitution and corresponding florida law.

Text: Defendant again alleges that counsel had a conflict of interest because counsel was in fear of defendant. This claim was raised earlier in this motion. Again, defendant does not identify any specific lapse during the representation that allegedly occurred because of the alleged conflict of interest. It is facially insufficient. Ragsdale v. State, 720 So.2d 203, 207 (Fla.1998). It is also meritless. Claims of conflict of interest must be based on dual representation and not on conflicts with an attorney's self interest. See Beets v. Collins[Scott ], 65 F.2d[F.3d] 1258, 1270-71 (5th Cir.1995). Accordingly, this claim is denied without an evidentiary hearing