Opinion
No. 1D21-3613
03-08-2023
Cody LOVELESS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Cody Loveless, pro se, Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Jovona I. Parker, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Cody Loveless, pro se, Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Jovona I. Parker, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Long, J.
Cody Loveless entered a plea of nolo contendere to sexual battery and witness tampering. The trial court imposed a sentence of six years followed by ten years of probation. Loveless filed a postconviction motion in which he alleged his trial counsel was ineffective for misadvising him as to the statutory maximum penalty for the charged offenses. He also alleged that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to convey his acceptance of two favorable plea offers from the State. The motion was set for an evidentiary hearing. Before the hearing, Loveless filed a motion for the appointment of postconviction counsel and a motion for limited discovery. Both were denied. After the evidentiary hearing, the postconviction court denied relief.
I
"A trial court's order denying a motion to appoint postconviction counsel in a noncapital case is reviewed for abuse of discretion." Hartfield v. State , 312 So. 3d 172, 173 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021). In determining whether to appoint postconviction counsel, the court should consider the adversary nature of the proceeding, its complexity, the need for an evidentiary hearing, or the need for substantial legal research. Graham v. State , 372 So.2d 1363, 1366 (Fla. 1979). The issues here were factual, concerning the nature of plea offers and communications to Loveless. We find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying the request for counsel. Hartfield , 312 So. 3d 172 at 173 (holding that a dispute about whether a plea offer existed was purely factual, not overly complex, and did not require substantial legal research).
II
We review a trial court's ruling denying postconviction discovery for an abuse of discretion. State v. Lewis , 656 So. 2d 1248, 1250 (Fla. 1994). A decision to allow discovery requires a showing of good cause. Id . Loveless did not make any argument in his discovery motion to show it was necessary. Instead, he discussed unrelated matters. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying his request for discovery.
III
Finally, Loveless asserts that his defense counsel failed to convey his acceptance of the State's favorable plea offers and failed to properly inform him of the correct statutory maximum penalty. Trial defense counsel testified that the State never made the favorable plea offers that Loveless claimed to have accepted. Counsel also testified that he properly explained the maximum penalty to Loveless. The postconviction court found trial defense counsel's testimony credible and those findings are supported by competent, substantial evidence.
To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must show more than the ordinary imperfections that inevitably accompany human endeavors. The defendant must show that his trial counsel's performance was so egregiously deficient that "counsel was not functioning as the ‘counsel’ guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment." Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). And the deficiency must ultimately result in prejudice to the defendant. Id . Loveless failed to make that showing.
AFFIRMED .
B.L. Thomas and Kelsey, JJ., concur.