Opinion ID: 1795830
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Counsel's Failure to Object to Jury Instructions

Text: Sochor argues that his attorney was ineffective for failing to object to the following jury instructions: (1) the instructions regarding the prior violent felony, committed during the course of a felony, cold, calculated, and premeditated, and heinous, atrocious, or cruel aggravating circumstances; (2) the instruction that he claims improperly shifted to him the burden of proving that a death sentence was inappropriate; (3) the instruction that he claims led the jury to believe that its role was merely advisory, in violation of Caldwell v. Mississippi, 472 U.S. 320, 105 S.Ct. 2633, 86 L.Ed.2d 231 (1985); and (4) the instruction concerning the murder in the course of a felony aggravating circumstance, which he claims violated Stringer v. Black, 503 U.S. 222, 112 S.Ct. 1130, 117 L.Ed.2d 367 (1992), by rendering that aggravating circumstance illusory. We reject each of these claims because Sochor cannot demonstrate the prejudice required to prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim. On direct appeal, we found that the prior violent felony, committed during the course of a felony, and heinous, atrocious, or cruel aggravating circumstances were supported by the evidence. Sochor, 619 So.2d at 292. And although we found on direct appeal that the cold, calculated, and premeditated aggravating circumstance was not supported by the evidence, we held the error to be harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Id. at 292-93. We also held that the burden-shifting claim, while not preserved for review, was nevertheless without merit. Id. at 291 n. 10; see also Demps v. Dugger, 714 So.2d 365, 367-68 & n. 8 (Fla.1998) (holding such a claim to be procedurally barred as an issue that should have been raised on direct appeal and noting that such claims repeatedly have been rejected on the merits). We also stated on direct appeal that Florida's standard jury instructions do not violate Caldwell. See Sochor, 619 So.2d at 291. And finally, we previously have held that there is no merit to the argument that an underlying felony cannot be used as an aggravating circumstance. See Freeman v. State, 761 So.2d 1055, 1067 (Fla.2000).