Cody v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Cody v. State

678 So. 2d 9, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 8789, 1996 WL 468788

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 20, 1996

DocketNo. 95-1263

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 678 So. 2d 9 (Cody 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

Cody v. State, 678 So. 2d 9, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 8789, 1996 WL 468788 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the three issues raised by appellant in this appeal. We write only to address the fact that in the instant case appellant raised as his third issue the ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Although the general rule is that such claims are barred on direct appeal, an exception “arises when the record below is sufficient to allow determination of an effectiveness claim.” Loren v. State, 601 So.2d 271, 272-273 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). In the instant case, the trial court was presented with the ineffectiveness claims in motions for new trial and rehearing, and the court conducted two evidentiary hearings on these claims. This court, therefore, was provided with an ample record regarding the issue, and the trial court’s denial of relief is affirmed without further discussion. Because the issue was properly brought on direct appeal, appellant is procedurally barred from raising this issue by postconviction proceedings. Id. at 273.

MINER and LAWRENCE, JJ., and SHIVERS, Senior Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the three issues raised by appellant in this appeal. We write only to address the fact that in the instant case appellant raised as his third issue the ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Although the general rule is that such claims are barred on direct appeal, an exception “arises when the record below is sufficient to allow determination of an effectiveness claim.” Loren v. State, 601 So.2d 271, 272-273 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). In the instant case, the trial court was presented with the ineffectiveness claims in motions for new trial and rehearing, and the court conducted two evidentiary hearings on these claims. This court, therefore, was provided with an ample record regarding the issue, and the trial court’s denial of relief is affirmed without further discussion. Because the issue was properly brought on direct appeal, appellant is procedurally barred from raising this issue by postconviction proceedings. Id. at 273.

MINER and LAWRENCE, JJ., and SHIVERS, Senior Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

678 So. 2d 9, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 8789, 1996 WL 468788, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cody-v-state-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack