Giles v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Giles v. State

262 So. 3d 881

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 5, 2019

DocketNo. 1D18-1110

StatusPublished

This text of 262 So. 3d 881 (Giles 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

Giles v. State, 262 So. 3d 881 (Fla. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The writ of habeas corpus alleging ineffectiveness of appellate counsel is denied as untimely, pursuant to rule 9.141(d)(5), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Partridge v. Moore , 768 So.2d 1128 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). Even if we were to reach the merits, appellate counsel is not ineffective for failure to raise every conceivable nonfrivolous issue. See Valentine v. State , 98 So.3d 44, 57 (Fla. 2012).

Bilbrey, Winokur, and Jay, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

The writ of habeas corpus alleging ineffectiveness of appellate counsel is denied as untimely, pursuant to rule 9.141(d)(5), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Partridge v. Moore , 768 So.2d 1128 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). Even if we were to reach the merits, appellate counsel is not ineffective for failure to raise every conceivable nonfrivolous issue. See Valentine v. State , 98 So.3d 44, 57 (Fla. 2012).

Bilbrey, Winokur, and Jay, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

262 So. 3d 881, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/giles-v-state-fladistctapp-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack