Christopher Rivera v. The State of Florida

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedAugust 14, 2024
Docket2023-0723
StatusPublished

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.

Bluebook
Christopher Rivera v. The State of Florida, (Fla. Ct. App. 2024).

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prosecutor would not have withdrawn the offer, (3) the court would have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

Strickland v. Washington
466 U.S. 668 (Supreme Court, 1984)
Blanco v. State
702 So. 2d 1250 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1997)
Alcorn v. State
121 So. 3d 419 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
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.