Huff v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Huff v. State

869 So. 2d 608, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 2666, 2004 WL 393247

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 4, 2004

DocketNo. 1D03-3970

StatusPublished

This text of 869 So. 2d 608 (Huff 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

Huff v. State, 869 So. 2d 608, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 2666, 2004 WL 393247 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s summary denial of the appellant’s postconviction claims. We write only to address the appellant’s claim that his counsel was ineffective for failing to object when the trial court read the forcible felony instruction to the jury. Upon a full review of the record, we conclude that, in this case, the trial court’s inclusion of the forcible felony instruction within the overall body of instruction on self-defense was not misleading or confusing and did not deprive the appellant of his defense of self-defense. See Giles v. State, 831 So.2d 1263, 1265 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). Accordingly, the trial court’s summary denial is AFFIRMED.

DAVIS, VAN NORTWICK and HAWKES, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s summary denial of the appellant’s postconviction claims. We write only to address the appellant’s claim that his counsel was ineffective for failing to object when the trial court read the forcible felony instruction to the jury. Upon a full review of the record, we conclude that, in this case, the trial court’s inclusion of the forcible felony instruction within the overall body of instruction on self-defense was not misleading or confusing and did not deprive the appellant of his defense of self-defense. See Giles v. State, 831 So.2d 1263, 1265 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). Accordingly, the trial court’s summary denial is AFFIRMED.

DAVIS, VAN NORTWICK and HAWKES, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

869 So. 2d 608, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 2666, 2004 WL 393247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/huff-v-state-fladistctapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack