Bridges v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bridges v. State

445 So. 2d 596, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 11466

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Bridges v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 28904 →

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 25, 1984·No. No. 82-1665·Published

Opinion

UPON PETITION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

We initially affirmed Per Curiam, 444 So.2d 425, the convictions of appellant, Brian Scott Bridges, without opinion. One of the appellate grounds asserted was the alleged ineffective assistance of counsel. We abide by our earlier affirmance. However, said affirmance shall be without prej[597]*597udice to the right of appellant to present his allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel to the trial court via Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850.

Except for the foregoing, the Petition for Rehearing is

DENIED.

GLICKSTEIN and WALDEN, JJ., and GOLDMAN, MURRAY, Associate Judge, concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UPON PETITION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

We initially affirmed Per Curiam, 444 So.2d 425, the convictions of appellant, Brian Scott Bridges, without opinion. One of the appellate grounds asserted was the alleged ineffective assistance of counsel. We abide by our earlier affirmance. However, said affirmance shall be without prej[597]*597udice to the right of appellant to present his allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel to the trial court via Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850.

Except for the foregoing, the Petition for Rehearing is

DENIED.

GLICKSTEIN and WALDEN, JJ., and GOLDMAN, MURRAY, Associate Judge, concur.

Bridges v. State, 445 So. 2d 596, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 11466 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

445 So. 2d 596 (Bridges v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.