Cruz v. State

794 So. 2d 725, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 13161, 2001 WL 1093074
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 19, 2001·No. No. 3D00-3297·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

After the evidentiary hearing required by Cruz v. State, 760 So.2d 1095 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000), on “the issue of defense counsel’s alleged ineffectiveness in failing to investigate and produce medical testimony concerning the extent of the victim’s injuries,” Cruz, 760 So.2d at 1095, the trial court found that counsel had not been ineffective. Cruz again appeals but we find no error in this ruling. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); Johnson v. State, 769 So.2d 990 (Fla.2000); Gonzalez v. State, 579 So.2d 145 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991).

Affirmed.

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

Cruz v. State, 794 So. 2d 725, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 13161, 2001 WL 1093074 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

794 So. 2d 725 (Cruz v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Wittman
794 So. 2d 725 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)