Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Hammett v. State

Hammett v. State

804 So. 2d 522, 2001 WL 1657206
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 28, 2001·No. 5D01-3478·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

804 So.2d 522 (2001)

Allen A. HAMMETT, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 5D01-3478.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

December 28, 2001.

*523 Kurt Erlenbach, Titusville, for Appellant.

No Appearance for Appellee.

GRIFFIN, J.

Appellant, Allen A. Hammett, appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief based on a claim of ineffective assistance of post-conviction counsel. We affirm for two reasons: first, ineffective assistance of post-conviction counsel is not a cognizable claim. Waterhouse v. State, 792 So.2d 1176, 1193 (Fla. 2001); State v. Riechmann, 777 So.2d 342, 364 n. 22 (Fla.2000). Second, there is no colorable merit to the claim.

AFFIRMED.

SAWAYA and PALMER, JJ., concur.

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

Hammett v. State, 804 So. 2d 522, 2001 WL 1657206 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

804 So. 2d 522 (Hammett v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Snow v. State
832 So. 2d 970 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
Simpson v. State
832 So. 2d 929 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
Hammett v. State
827 So. 2d 406 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)