Opinion
No. SC14–498.
04-14-2015
Phillup Alan PARTIN, Petitioner(s) v. Julie L. JONES, etc., Respondent(s).
Opinion
Petitioner Phillup Partin raises the following five claims in his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus: (1) appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge the denial of Partin's motion to recuse; (2) appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge the exclusion of evidence regarding one witness (Fred Kaufman) allegedly threatening another witness (John Dykstra) during the trial; (3) appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge the exclusion of similar-fact evidence regarding Fred Kaufman; (4) appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to appeal the denial of constitutional challenges to Florida's death penalty; and (5) appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge the denial of Partin's motion for judgment of acquittal. However, appellate counsel cannot be deemed ineffective for failing to raise these claims on direct appeal because they are without merit. See Mungin v. State, 141 So.3d 138, 147 (Fla.2013) ; Ford v. State, 801 So.2d 318, 320 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) ; State v. Savino, 567 So.2d 892, 894 (Fla.1990) ; Partin v. State, 82 So.3d 31, 37 n. 4 (Fla.2011) ; Chavez v. State, 12 So.3d 199, 213–14 (Fla.2009) ; Kilgore v. State, 55 So.3d 487, 513–14 (Fla.2010).
Accordingly, Partin's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is hereby denied.
LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, POLSTON, and PERRY, JJ., concur.