Craven v. State
This text of 624 So. 2d 866 (Craven 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.
Opinion
In this appeal from judgment and sentence for manufacture of cannabis, possession of more than 20 grams of cannabis, and possession of paraphernalia, appellant contends he was ineffectively represented at trial. He argues that this ease falls within the narrow exception to the rule that claims of ineffectiveness of counsel are collateral matters which must first be raised on motion for post-conviction relief. Stewart v. State, 420 So.2d 862 (Fla.1982). We disagree, and affirm without prejudice to raise the claim of ineffectiveness of trial counsel in an appropriate motion for post-conviction relief.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
624 So. 2d 866, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 10317, 1993 WL 405176, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/craven-v-state-fladistctapp-1993.