Christopher Falzone v. State of Florida
This text of Christopher Falzone v. State of Florida (Christopher Falzone v. State of Florida) 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.
Opinion
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
CHRISTOPHER FALZONE, Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.
No. 4D2024-0662
[February 26, 2025]
Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Andrew L. Siegel, Judge; L.T. Case No. 18-009848CF10A.
Melanie Anitra Malavé, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Paul Patti, III, Senior Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Franqui v. State, 59 So. 3d 82, 96 (Fla. 2011) (recognizing that “mere conclusory allegations” are insufficient to state a claim under rule 3.850); Hammond v. State, 34 So. 3d 58, 60-61 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (holding that claims lacking specific facts establishing a reasonable probability of prejudice should be summarily denied).
MAY, GERBER and CONNER, JJ., concur.
* * *
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Christopher Falzone v. State of Florida, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/christopher-falzone-v-state-of-florida-fladistctapp-2025.