Document: 455 U.S. 586 102 S.Ct. 1300 71 L.Ed.2d 475 Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, Petitionerv.Jose TORNA. No. 81-362. March 22, 1982. PER CURIAM. 1 Respondent is in custody pursuant to several felony convictions that were affirmed by the Third District Court Appeal Florida. Torna v. State, 358 So.2d 1109 (1978). The Supreme dismissed an application for a writ certiorari, on ground was not filed timely.1 362 1057 A petition rehearing and clarification later denied. App. Pet. Cert. A-15. 2 thereafter habeas corpus United States Southern Florida, contending he had been denied his right effective assistance counsel failure retained file certiorari timely. timely did render counsel's actions "so grossly deficient as proceedings fundamentally unfair." Id., at A-22. In reaching this conclusion, noted review discretionary; "[f]ailure Court, therefore, only prevented [respondent] from applying further discretionary review." A-28. Appeals reversed. 649 F.2d 290 (CA5 1981).2 3 Ross Moffitt, 417 600, 94 2437, 41 341 (1974), held criminal defendant does have constitutional pursue state appeals or applications Court. contest finding no absolute appeal Court.3 Since respondent counsel, could be deprived timely.4 correct dismissing petition. 4 motion leave proceed forma pauperis granted. granted, judgment therefore 5 It so ordered. 6 Justice BRENNAN would set case oral argument. 7 MARSHALL, dissenting. 8 majority predicates its decision which appeals. reasons because lawyer's violate counsel. my view, however, Moffitt improperly decided. See id., 619-621, S.Ct., 2448-2449 (Douglas J., dissenting, joined JJ.). I believe Particularly where conviction challenged grounds, permissive highest court may most meaningful will receive. Moreover, seeks review, attorney vital. Because disagree with Court's position conclusion also. 9 Even if believed correctly decided, dissent majority's provides recourse who has seek attorney's error. Although respondent's Sixth Amendment infringed, due process. Respondent's promised him reasonably relied promise. Counsel nonetheless failed application.* As result, State's court. suggested above, loss significant. hold when can show promise process requires State consider application, even untimely. To deny simply error unfair. Requiring courts untimely impose heavy burden. required grant application; it barred filed. 10 argues deprivation implicates interest, there action here. caused counsel—a private attorney—and State. Ante, 588, n.4. sufficient involvement satisfy requirements Fourteenth Amendment. inconsistent Cuyler Sullivan, 446 335, 100 1708, 64 333 (1980). case, rejected petitioner's assertion failings trial provide basis federal relief, conduct involve action. trial, proceeding initiated conducted itself, within meaning "When obtains through such unconstitutionally deprives liberty." 343, 1715. "[T]he itself defendant's conviction." 344-345, 1716. 11 true Sullivan involved challenge during while involves post-trial attorney. However, are integral part just much implicated those itself. Here, example, responsible structuring procedure reviewed. particular, designed rules governing including rule automatically out time. Under circumstances, think clear state-action requirement satisfied. "It appearing notice filed, ordered cause hereby sua sponte, subject reinstatement timeliness established proper fifteen days date order. Fla.R.App.P. 9.120." A-13. Citing Pressley Wainwright, 540 818 (1976), cert. denied, 430 987, 97 1688, 52 383 (1977), first "the court-appointed constitute ineffective assistance." F.2d, 291. On recent (1980), then stated "there distinction between privately evaluation claim 292. Finally, quoted Perez 640 596, 598 (1981), proposition " 'when lawyer . perform client taken, fairness deceived granted out-of-time appeal.' these statements, reversed district court's denial corpus," ibid., remanded consistent opinion. Like limited mandatory appellate jurisdiction. Fla.Const., Art. V, § 3. never contended, under Thus, we need determine extent case. law fact review. Such deprivation—even implicating interest—was Certainly, deprive law. * Notice intent apply office Clerk Appeal, July 17, 1978. one day late, 18, According respondent, secretary attempted deliver papers 14, 1981. She became lost traveling Clerk's office, arrive until after closed. she realize placed night depository box, took them home mail. Record 29-30. comply circumstances beyond control, doubly

Category: 0