Christopher Rivera v. The State of Florida
This text of Christopher Rivera v. The State of Florida (Christopher Rivera v. The 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
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed August 14, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D23-723 Lower Tribunal Nos. F04-22000, F04-22001A, F04-22003, F04-22326, F04-22416, F04-22322A, F04-22323, F04-22828A, F04-22319B, F04-23283D, F04-23492A, F04-22320, F04-22002, F20-570 ________________
Christopher Rivera, Appellant,
vs.
The State of Florida, Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Richard Hersch, Judge.
Christopher Rivera, in proper person.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Katryna Santa Cruz, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before LINDSEY, GORDO, and GOODEN, JJ.
PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S.Ct.
2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984) (announcing two-part test for ineffective
assistance of counsel requiring the defendant to show that his or her
counsel’s performance was deficient and prejudiced the defense); Alcorn v.
State, 121 So. 3d 419, 422 (Fla. 2013) (“[T]o show prejudice, the defendant
must demonstrate a reasonable probability, defined as a probability sufficient
to undermine confidence in the outcome, that (1) he or she would have
accepted the offer had counsel advised the defendant correctly, (2) the
prosecutor would not have withdrawn the offer, (3) the court would have
accepted the offer, and (4) the conviction or sentence, or both, under the
offer's terms would have been less severe than under the judgment and
sentence that in fact were imposed.”); Blanco v. State, 702 So. 2d 1250,
1252 (Fla. 1997) (“As long as the trial court's findings are supported by
competent substantial evidence, this Court will not substitute its judgment for
that of the trial court on questions of fact, likewise of the credibility of the
witnesses as well as the weight to be given to the evidence by the trial court.”)
(internal quotations omitted).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Christopher Rivera v. The State of Florida, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/christopher-rivera-v-the-state-of-florida-fladistctapp-2024.