Duperier v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Duperier v. State

590 So. 2d 511, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 11973, 1991 WL 253848

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 4, 1991

DocketNo. 91-3182

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 590 So. 2d 511 (Duperier 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

Duperier v. State, 590 So. 2d 511, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 11973, 1991 WL 253848 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Devalon Duperier appeals from the trial court’s denial of his motion brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. He alleges ineffectiveness of trial counsel in his handling of appellant’s motion to suppress cocaine discovered upon a stop of appellant’s rental car. We affirm.

It is well settled that to prevail upon a motion alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel, the moving party must meet a two-prong test: first, that counsel’s performance was below the norm of professionally accepted standards, and secondly, that such lack of effectiveness would have changed the outcome of the case. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). While appellant has probably satisfied the first prong of Strickland, we hold that counsel’s failure to preserve the issue for direct appellate review by failing to object at the time the cocaine was offered into evidence does not warrant granting relief, as this failure would not have changed the outcome of the case. The trial court properly denied the motion to suppress, and even had counsel preserved the issue by making a contemporaneous objection, the trial court would properly have overruled the objection and we would have affirmed on direct review. See Florida v. Jimeno, — U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 1801, 114 L.Ed.2d 297 (1991); Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032, 103 S.Ct. 3469, 77 L.Ed.2d 1201 (1983); State v. Dilyerd, 467 So.2d 301 (Fla.1985); State v. Sears, 493 So.2d 99 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986).

AFFIRMED.

LETTS, WARNER and POLEN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Devalon Duperier appeals from the trial court’s denial of his motion brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. He alleges ineffectiveness of trial counsel in his handling of appellant’s motion to suppress cocaine discovered upon a stop of appellant’s rental car. We affirm.

It is well settled that to prevail upon a motion alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel, the moving party must meet a two-prong test: first, that counsel’s performance was below the norm of professionally accepted standards, and secondly, that such lack of effectiveness would have changed the outcome of the case. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). While appellant has probably satisfied the first prong of Strickland, we hold that counsel’s failure to preserve the issue for direct appellate review by failing to object at the time the cocaine was offered into evidence does not warrant granting relief, as this failure would not have changed the outcome of the case. The trial court properly denied the motion to suppress, and even had counsel preserved the issue by making a contemporaneous objection, the trial court would properly have overruled the objection and we would have affirmed on direct review. See Florida v. Jimeno, — U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 1801, 114 L.Ed.2d 297 (1991); Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032, 103 S.Ct. 3469, 77 L.Ed.2d 1201 (1983); State v. Dilyerd, 467 So.2d 301 (Fla.1985); State v. Sears, 493 So.2d 99 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986).

AFFIRMED.

LETTS, WARNER and POLEN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

590 So. 2d 511, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 11973, 1991 WL 253848, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/duperier-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack