Moore v. State

Summary

The Supreme Court of Florida affirmed the denial of Thomas James Moore’s motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 and denied his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The court rejected or found procedurally barred Moore’s claims concerning public-records requests, amendments to his postconviction motion, judicial disqualification, ineffective assistance of trial counsel, and ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. A justice concurred in part and dissented in part regarding the public-records issue.

Holdings

1. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Moore's requests for additional public records because the record supported the conclusion that relevant records had been provided, Moore failed to show that additional information remained undisclosed, and he failed to comply with Rule 3.852(i).
2. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by striking Moore's third amended Rule 3.850 motion.
3. Moore's motion to disqualify the trial judge was legally insufficient because the alleged circumstances did not establish a well-grounded fear that he would not receive a fair hearing.
4. Moore failed to establish ineffective assistance of counsel arising from counsel's failure to object to the prosecutor's isolated references to Moore as the "devil."
5. Moore was not entitled to habeas relief because his appellate-counsel claims were procedurally barred or meritless.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying Moore's requests for additional public records.
2. Whether the trial court properly refused to consider Moore's third amended Rule 3.850 motion.
3. Whether Moore's motion to disqualify the trial judge was legally sufficient.
4. Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the prosecutor's allegedly improper closing-argument comments.
5. Whether Moore was entitled to habeas relief based on alleged ineffective assistance of appellate counsel.

Disposition

affirmed