Cunningham v. State
801 So. 2d 967, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 16382, 2001 WL 1472677
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Cunningham v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 838 So. 2d 627 →
Opinion
We affirm the trial court’s denial of appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief. Counsel was not ineffective when failing to present a double jeopardy challenge to appellant’s convictions. State v. McCloud, 577 So.2d 939 (Fla.1991). Similarly, counsel’s performance was neither deficient during defense witness Rod Allen’s testimony, nor during closing arguments.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cunningham v. State, 801 So. 2d 967, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 16382, 2001 WL 1472677 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).
801 So. 2d 967 (Cunningham v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State v. McCloud
577 So. 2d 939 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1991)