No. 25-525

Damion Anthony Delapena v. Florida Department of Corrections

Lower Court: Eleventh Circuit
Docketed: 2025-10-29
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived Experienced Counsel
Tags: constitutional-rights criminal-procedure evidence-suppression habeas-corpus ineffective-assistance-of-counsel plea-bargaining
Key Terms:
FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure HabeasCorpus Securities Privacy
Latest Conference: 2025-12-05
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does federal habeas petitioner make a 'substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right' under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) where his trial attorney failed to assert valid grounds for the suppression of incriminating evidence, told the petitioner that exonerating evidence was 'not particularly helpful,' and misadvised the petitioner about his eligibility for a downward departure prior to the entry of his guilty plea?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

Damion Delapena claimed in his federal habeas corpus petition that he received ineffective assistance of counsel when his attorney failed to file a motion to suppress. His petition identified precedent that would have all but compelled the trial court to suppress incriminating evidenc e. But his attorney failed to move for its suppression, and so Delapena pled guilty to five armed robberies. Delapena also claimed he received ineffective assistance of counsel when his trial attorney told him cellular phone records produced during discovery were “not particularly helpful ,” even though th e records showed (1) he was over two hours away from the scene of one of the robberies he pled guilty to ; and (2) his brother was far from the scene of any of those robberies, which undercut the State’s theory that his car served as the getaway vehicle. In his final ineffective assistance of counsel claim, Peti tioner established his attorney mistakenly advised him that he was eligible for a downward departure if he entered a guilty plea, even though every ground for departure counsel raised at sentencing was invalid. Both the district court and the Eleventh Circuit denied Delapena a certificate of appealability. This petition presents the following question: 1. Does federal habeas petitioner make a “substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right ” under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) where his trial attorney failed to assert valid grounds for the ii suppress ion of incriminating evidence, told the petitioner that exonerating evidence was “not particularly helpful,” and misadvised the petition er about his eligibility for a downward departure prior to the entry of his guilty plea?

Docket Entries

2025-12-08
Petition DENIED.
2025-11-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/5/2025.
2025-11-05
Waiver of FL DOC of right to respond submitted.
2025-11-05
Waiver of right of respondent FL DOC to respond filed.
2025-10-27
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 28, 2025)

Attorneys

Damion Delapena
Andrew Brooks GreenleeAndrew B. Greenlee, P.A., Petitioner
Andrew Brooks GreenleeAndrew B. Greenlee, P.A., Petitioner
FL DOC
Celia A. Terenzio — Respondent
Celia A. Terenzio — Respondent