Grosvenor v. State

816 So. 2d 822, 2002 WL 999625
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 17, 2002·No. 5D01-905·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

816 So.2d 822 (2002)

Traci Ann GROSVENOR, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 5D01-905.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

May 17, 2002.

Robert S. Griscti, Gainesville, for Appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Pamela J. Koller, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm. See Siegel v. State, 586 So.2d 1341, 1342 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)(in order to maintain a claim of ineffective assistance with either a nolo contendere or guilty plea, a defendant must show that he had a viable defense); Diaz v. State, 534 So.2d 817 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). We certify conflict with Cousino v. State, 770 So.2d 1258 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) and Mason v. State, 742 So.2d 370 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), both of which held that it was not necessary to demonstrate a viable defense to obtain relief in these types of cases.

AFFIRMED.

THOMPSON, C.J., COBB and ORFINGER, R. B., JJ., concur.

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

Grosvenor v. State, 816 So. 2d 822, 2002 WL 999625 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

816 So. 2d 822 (Grosvenor v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Grosvenor v. State
874 So. 2d 1176 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2004)
Hill v. State
830 So. 2d 219 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
Gould v. State
826 So. 2d 1101 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)