5D06-3851 Leonard Luckey v. State

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » Florida » Florida Fifth District Court » 2008 » 5D06-3851 Leonard Luckey v. State

State: Florida

Court: Florida Fifth District Court

Docket No: 5D06-3851

Case Date: 02/11/2008

Preview:IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM 2008

LEONARD LUCKEY, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. ________________________________/ Opinion filed February 15, 2008 3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Volusia County, R. Michael Hutcheson, Judge. Leonard Luckey, Orlando, pro se. Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Robin A. Compton, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee. CASE NO. 5D06-3851

LAWSON, J. Leonard Luckey, appearing pro se, appeals the trial court's orders denying his motion for postconviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The trial court summarily denied five of Luckey's six postconviction claims, and denied the last claim after conducting an evidentiary hearing. We affirm the summary denial of Luckey's claims two, three, four, and five, without further comment. We reverse as to Luckey's other two claims, for the reasons explained below.

Luckey was charged by amended information with burglary of a dwelling with a battery. He was tried by jury, convicted as charged and sentenced to natural life as a Prison Releasee Reoffender ("PRR").1 His conviction and sentence w ere affirmed on appeal. Luckey v. State , 876 So. 2d 575 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). A mandate was issued on June 29, 2004. Luckey filed his motion for postconviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 on June 22, 2006. As his first issue, Luckey claimed that his counsel was ineffective for failing to request that he receive a "further" mental health exam, failing to tell the court that he was taking prescribed psychotropic medication during the trial, and also failing to request that the court instruct the jury that he was taking psychotropic medication pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.215. We read Luckey's claim as an attempt to assert that counsel was ineffective for allowing Luckey to proceed to trial while incompetent, or for failing to pursue an available insanity defense. The State pointed out and the trial court agreed that as to this claim Luckey has not asserted in his motion that he actually was incompetent to proceed to trial or insane at the time of his offense. We agree that that the claim was therefore facially insufficient. Cf. Gillis v. State , 807 So. 2d 204 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (recognizing

postconviction relief movant's conclusory allegations that he was incompetent to plead guilty to robbery, unsupported by any corroborating evidence, was insufficient to state a claim for relief); Baker v. State , 404 So. 2d 1151 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981) (holding a motion by a prisoner asserting, as basis for his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, his own mental incompetence at time of trial, in general terms with no corroboration and no

1

Download 5D06-3851 Leonard Luckey v. State.pdf