Castano v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Castano v. State

760 So. 2d 1101, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 8152, 2000 WL 864171

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 30, 2000

DocketNo. 5D00-1231

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 760 So. 2d 1101 (Castano v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Castano v. State, 760 So. 2d 1101, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 8152, 2000 WL 864171 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

W. SHARP, J.

Castaño appeals from a summary denial of his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Casta-ño argues he is entitled to a new trial because his trial attorney was ineffective for various reasons. The trial court addressed each of Castano’s arguments in a written order denying relief, with buttressing attachments, explaining why they are either factually or legally without merit. We affirm.

We caution Castaño to refrain from raising the same arguments which were made, or should have been made, on direct appeal, in the guise of an ineffective assistance of trial counsel claim. See Maharaj v. State, 684 So.2d 726 (Fla.1996); Rose v. State, 675 So.2d 567 (Fla.1996); Cherry v. State, 659 So.2d 1069 (Fla.1995); Eight v. Dugger, 574 So.2d 1066 (Fla.1990).

AFFIRMED.

SAWAYA and PLEUS, JJ., concur.

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

W. SHARP, J.

Castaño appeals from a summary denial of his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Casta-ño argues he is entitled to a new trial because his trial attorney was ineffective for various reasons. The trial court addressed each of Castano’s arguments in a written order denying relief, with buttressing attachments, explaining why they are either factually or legally without merit. We affirm.

We caution Castaño to refrain from raising the same arguments which were made, or should have been made, on direct appeal, in the guise of an ineffective assistance of trial counsel claim. See Maharaj v. State, 684 So.2d 726 (Fla.1996); Rose v. State, 675 So.2d 567 (Fla.1996); Cherry v. State, 659 So.2d 1069 (Fla.1995); Eight v. Dugger, 574 So.2d 1066 (Fla.1990).

AFFIRMED.

SAWAYA and PLEUS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

760 So. 2d 1101, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 8152, 2000 WL 864171, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/castano-v-state-fladistctapp-2000.

Opinion

W. SHARP, J.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack