Byrd v. State

220 So. 2d 14, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 5990
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 11, 1969·No. No. 68-193·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is a direct appeal from two convictions in the Criminal Court of Record of Dade County, Florida, judgments and sentences thereon accordingly.

The principal point on appeal was that the appellant was not properly represented in the trial court by his privately retained counsel.1

Generally, complaints of ineffective assistance of counsel will not be received on appeal wherein such counsel was privately retained. Everett v. State, Fla. App.1964, 161 So.2d 714; Amaral v. State, Fla.App.1965, 171 So.2d 549; Todd v. State, Fla.App.1965, 176 So.2d 344; Coyner v. State, Fla.App.1965, 177 So.2d 715.

The appellant also complains that his counsel failed to call witnesses for his defense and this denied him a fair trial. This is without merit. Simpson v. State, Fla.App.1964, 164 So.2d 224; Jackson v. State, Fla.App.1964, 166 So.2d 194; Smith v. State, Fla.App.1965, 180 So.2d 675.

Therefore, no error appearing in the convictions and judgments here under review, they are hereby affirmed.

Affirmed.

Footnotes

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

Byrd v. State, 220 So. 2d 14, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 5990 (Fla. Ct. App. 1969).

220 So. 2d 14 (Byrd v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ivey v. DEPT. OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVS.
974 So. 2d 480 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2008)
Vagner v. Wainwright
398 So. 2d 448 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1981)
Dillingham v. State
293 So. 2d 80 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1974)
Humphries v. State
232 So. 2d 23 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1970)