Cotto v. State

271 So. 3d 1130
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 20, 2019·No. No. 3D17-537·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Following a protracted evidentiary hearing, appellant failed to "demonstrate both deficiency and prejudice," thus we affirm the trial court's denial of appellant's motion for postconviction relief. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984) ("A convicted defendant's claim that counsel's assistance was so defective as to require reversal ... has two components. First, the defendant must show that counsel's performance was deficient ... Second, the defendant must show that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense."); Krawczuk v. State, 92 So.3d 195, 202 (Fla. 2012) ("[T]his Court has held that for ineffective assistance of counsel claims to be successful, the defendant must demonstrate both deficiency and prejudice.") (citing Bolin v. State, 41 So.3d 151, 155 (Fla. 2010) ).

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

Cotto v. State, 271 So. 3d 1130 (Fla. Ct. App. 2019).

271 So. 3d 1130 (Cotto v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Strickland v. Washington
466 U.S. 668 (Supreme Court, 1984)
Bolin v. State
41 So. 3d 151 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2010)
Krawczuk v. State
92 So. 3d 195 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2012)