meritless claim in Florida

2017See Rutherford v. Moore, 774 So. 2d 637, 644 (Fla. 2000) (“The failure to raise a meritless claim does not render appellate counsel’s performance ineffective.”).

2006Cf. Rutherford v. Moore, 774 So.2d 637, 643 (Fla. 2000) (stating that appellate counsel cannot be ineffective for failing to raise a meritless claim).

2005See State v. Duncan, 894 So.2d 817, 831 (Fla.2004) (holding appellate counsel was not ineffective for failing to raise a meritless claim); Johnson, 695 So.2d at 267 (same).

2005See State v. Duncan, 894 So.2d 817, 831 (Fla.2004) (holding appellate counsel was not ineffective for failing to raise a meritless claim); Johnson, 695 So.2d at 267 (same).

2017See Maharaj v. State, 778 So.2d 944, 959 (Fla. 2000) (concluding defendant “failed to establish that he has standing [to bring Vienna Conven•tion claim], as treaties are between countries, not citizens”); Conde v. State, 860 So.2d 930, 953 (Fla. 2003) (“[E]ven if [the defendant] had standing to assert a right to consular assistance under the Vienna Convention and were to show that right was violated, this would not be grounds for suppression of an otherwise voluntary confession.”), Accordingly,- as appellate counsel cannot be ineffective for failing to raise a meritless claim, see Valle, 837 S

2017Accordingly, as appellate counsel cannot be ineffective for failing to raise a meritless claim, see Valle, 837 So. 2d at 908 , we deny relief.

2019Lukehart v. State, 70 So. 3d 503, 513 (Fla. 2011) (“Counsel cannot be deemed ineffective for failing to pursue a meritless claim.”).

2019Lukehart v. State, 70 So. 3d 503, 513 (Fla. 2011) (“Counsel cannot be deemed ineffective for failing to pursue a meritless claim.”).

2015Ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claims “may not be used to camouflage issues that should have been presented on direct appeal or in a postconviction motion.” Id. - 36 - Further, appellate counsel cannot be deemed ineffective for not pursuing a meritless claim.

2006See Bryant v. State, 901 So.2d 810, 826 (Fla.2005) ("Appellate counsel is under no duty to assert a meritless claim."); Spencer, 842 So.2d at 74 ("[A]ppellate counsel will not be considered ineffective for failing to raise issues that have little or no chance of success."); Freeman v. State, 761 So.2d 1055, 1070 (Fla.2000) ("Appellate counsel cannot be *837 ineffective for failing to raise an issue which is without merit."). [14] B.

2006Jones v. State, 928 So.2d 1178, 1182-83 (Fla.2006) (citing Teffeteller v. Dugger, 734 So.2d 1009, 1023 (Fla.1999) for proposition that "[t]rial counsel cannot be deemed ineffective for failing to raise meritless claims").

2002See, e.g., *136 Teffeteller, 734 So.2d at 1027 (concluding that appellate counsel cannot be deemed ineffective for failing to brief a meritless claim); Kokal v. Dugger, 718 So.2d at 142 .

2006See Card v. State, 497 So.2d 1169, 1177 (Fla.1986)(appellate counsel cannot be labeled ineffective for failing to raise issues which have no merit).

2003See id.

2017See Lukehart v. State, 70 So.3d 503, 513 (Fla. 2011) (“Counsel cannot be deemed ineffective for failing to pursue a meritless claim.” (citing Ferrell v. State, 29 So.3d 959, 975 (Fla. 2010); Mungin v. State, 932 So.2d 986, 997 (Fla. 2006))).

2017See Lukehart v. State, 70 So. 3d 503, 513 (Fla. 2011) (“Counsel cannot be deemed ineffective for failing to pursue a meritless claim.” (citing Ferrell v. State, 29 So. 3d 959, 975 (Fla. 2010); Mungin v. State, 932 So. 2d 986, 997 (Fla. 2006))).

2017Martin’s counsel “cannot be deemed ineffective for failing to raise a meritless claim.” Peede v. State, 955 So. 2d 480, 502-03 (Fla. 2007).

2011See Peede v. State, 955 So.2d 480, 502-03 (Fla.2007) (“[Counsel cannot be deemed ineffective for failing to raise a meritless claim or to anticipate a change in the law.”).

2017See Stephens, 975 So. 2d at 426 .

2015See Stephens, 975 So. 2d at 426 .

2017See, e.g., Troy v. State, 57 So.3d 828, 842-43 (Fla. 2011) (refusing to consider counsel deficient for failure to raise meritless claims).

2017See, e.g., Troy v. State, 57 So. 3d 828, 842-43 (Fla. 2011) (refusing to consider counsel deficient for failure to raise meritless claims).

2017See Lukehart v. State, 70 So.3d 503, 513 (Fla. 2011) (“Counsel cannot be deemed ineffective for failing to pursue a meritless claim.” (citing Ferrell v. State, 29 So.3d 959, 975 (Fla. 2010); Mungin v. State, 932 So.2d 986, 997 (Fla. 2006))).

2017See Lukehart v. State, 70 So. 3d 503, 513 (Fla. 2011) (“Counsel cannot be deemed ineffective for failing to pursue a meritless claim.” (citing Ferrell v. State, 29 So. 3d 959, 975 (Fla. 2010); Mungin v. State, 932 So. 2d 986, 997 (Fla. 2006))).

2016See Spencer, 842 So.2d at 63 ; see also Buzia v. State, 82 So.3d 784, 796 (Fla.2011) (holding that counsel was not ineffective for failing to present evidence.of drug and alcohol addiction during guilt phase to, demonstrate that, the murder was not planned because voluntary intoxication js not a valid defense).' -Accordingly, we deny relief on this claim.

2006See Bryant v. State, 901 So.2d 810, 826 (Fla.2005) ("Appellate counsel is under no duty to assert a meritless claim."); Spencer, 842 So.2d at 74 ("[A]ppellate counsel will not be considered ineffective for failing to raise issues that have little or no chance of success."); Freeman v. State, 761 So.2d 1055, 1070 (Fla.2000) ("Appellate counsel cannot be *837 ineffective for failing to raise an issue which is without merit."). [14] B.

2011See Groover v. Singletary, 656 So.2d 424, 425 (Fla.1995) (“Appellate counsel’s failure to raise nonmeritorious issues does not constitute ineffective assistance.”).

2011Groover, 656 So.2d at 425 .

2006See Pietri v. State, 885 So.2d 245, 273 (Fla.2004) (holding that appellate counsel cannot be found to be ineffective for failing to raise a meritless claim).

2005See San Martin v. State, 705 So.2d 1337, 1347 (Fla.1997) ("A party may not invite error and then be heard to complain of that error on appeal."). "[A]ppellate counsel cannot be ineffective for failing to present a meritless claim." Pietri v. State, 885 So.2d 245, 273 (Fla.2004). [11] Muhammad next asserts that appellate counsel were ineffective for failing to ensure that a complete record was compiled on appeal.

2024See Rigterink v. State, 193 So. 3d 846, 863 (Fla. 2016) (“The failure to raise a meritless claim does not result in deficient performance.”).

2022See Breedlove, 595 So. 2d at 11 . 8.

2021Further, Smith has failed to explain in his petition how the alleged deficiency “compromised the appellate process to such a degree as to undermine confidence in the fairness and correctness of the appellate result.” Wilson v. Wainwright, 474 So. 2d 1162, 1163 (Fla. 1985). - 52 - C.

2021See Hall v. State, 212 So. 3d 1001, 1014, 1033 (Fla. 2017); see also Allen v. State, 261 So. 3d 1255, 1269 (Fla. 2019).

2021See Hall v. State, 212 So. 3d 1001, 1014, 1033 (Fla. 2017); see also Allen v. State, 261 So. 3d 1255, 1269 (Fla. 2019).

2019But, this Court has recognized that prohibiting all pro se filing is considered an “extreme remedy” for “curtailing the egregious abuse of judicial processes.” Gaston v. State, 141 So. 3d 627, 628 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014); see also Bivins v. State, 35 So. 3d 67, 69 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (reversing a prohibition on further pro se filing where the defendant filed a single pro se motion raising a variation of an issue that the trial court already denied and ordered that it would not reconsider).

2019See Raleigh v. State, 932 So. 2d 1054, 1064 (Fla. 2006) (“[D]efense counsel cannot be deemed deficient for failing to make a meritless objection.”).

2019But, this Court has recognized that prohibiting all pro se filing is considered an “extreme remedy” for “curtailing the egregious abuse of judicial processes.” Gaston v. State, 141 So. 3d 627, 628 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014); see also Bivins v. State, 35 So. 3d 67, 69 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (reversing a prohibition on further pro se filing where the defendant filed a single pro se motion raising a variation of an issue that the trial court already denied and ordered that it would not reconsider).

2017See Maharaj v. State, 778 So.2d 944, 959 (Fla. 2000) (concluding defendant “failed to establish that he has standing [to bring Vienna Conven•tion claim], as treaties are between countries, not citizens”); Conde v. State, 860 So.2d 930, 953 (Fla. 2003) (“[E]ven if [the defendant] had standing to assert a right to consular assistance under the Vienna Convention and were to show that right was violated, this would not be grounds for suppression of an otherwise voluntary confession.”), Accordingly,- as appellate counsel cannot be ineffective for failing to raise a meritless claim, see Valle, 837 S

2017See Maharaj v. State, 778 So.2d 944, 959 (Fla. 2000) (concluding defendant “failed to establish that he has standing [to bring Vienna Conven•tion claim], as treaties are between countries, not citizens”); Conde v. State, 860 So.2d 930, 953 (Fla. 2003) (“[E]ven if [the defendant] had standing to assert a right to consular assistance under the Vienna Convention and were to show that right was violated, this would not be grounds for suppression of an otherwise voluntary confession.”), Accordingly,- as appellate counsel cannot be ineffective for failing to raise a meritless claim, see Valle, 837 S

2017See Rutherford v. Moore, 774 So.2d 637, 643 (Fla. 2000) (quoting Williamson v. Dugger, 651 So.2d 84, 86 (Fla. 1994)) (“If a legal issue ‘would in all probability have been found to be without merit’ had counsel raised the issue on direct appeal, the failure of appellate counsel to raise the meritless issue will not render appellate counsel’s performance ineffective.”). *94 Our review establishes that appellate counsel’s failure to raise the coraplained-of issue was not ineffective assistance of counsel as the defendant’s argument in this petition is without merit and no prejudice has been demo

2016See Evans, 995 So.2d at 954 .

2016See Merck v. State, 124 So.3d 785, 800 (Fla.2013). (holding counsel cannot be deficient for failing to present a meritless defense).