Opinion ID: 411288
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Motion for Post-Conviction Relief in State Court

Text: 12 In March 1980 Washington, now represented by different counsel, moved for post-conviction relief in state circuit court. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850. The primary focus of the motion was upon Tunkey's failure to investigate fully and develop character evidence that might have been presented to Judge Fuller as a matter in mitigation. In support of the motion, Washington attached fourteen affidavits from various friends, relatives, and acquaintances who stated that they would have testified on Washington's behalf if his attorney had requested them to do so. He also attached reports from two psychiatrists who stated that while [Washington] was not under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance, he was chronically frustrated and depressed because of his economic dilemma wherein he was unable to find employment and provide for his wife and children. 13 The Florida circuit court denied the motion without holding an evidentiary hearing. 4 It found that Washington had failed to satisfy the test for ineffective assistance of counsel established in Knight v. State, 394 So.2d 997 (Fla.1981), which requires a defendant to prove that his attorney's failure was a substantial and serious deficiency measurably below that of competent counsel, and that the failure caused prejudice to the defendant to the extent that there is a likelihood that the deficient conduct affected the outcome of the court proceedings. Id. at 1001 (citation omitted). 5 On appeal the Florida Supreme Court affirmed, finding that the appellant has failed under the Knight criteria to make a prima facie showing of substantial deficiency or possible prejudice and has failed to such a degree that we believe, to the point of moral certainty, that he is entitled to no relief under rule 3.850. 6 Washington v. State, 397 So.2d 285, 287 (Fla.1981). 14