Jerrold Baron v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Jerrold Baron v. State

152 So. 3d 678, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 18835, 2014 WL 6460850

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 19, 2014

Docket4D12-3780

StatusPublished

This text of 152 So. 3d 678 (Jerrold Baron 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

Jerrold Baron v. State, 152 So. 3d 678, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 18835, 2014 WL 6460850 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s thorough order denying appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief from his convictions for vehicular manslaughter and DUI manslaughter. After a full evidentiary hearing, the trial court concluded that none of the appellant’s contentions constituted ineffective assistance of counsel. Most claims were either unproven or were shown to be reasonable trial strategy decisions by counsel and agreed to by the appellant. Moreover, competent substan *679 tial evidence supports the trial court’s conclusion that, even if all of appellant’s claims of ineffective assistance and failure to present evidence had been cured at trial, there was no reasonable probability that the results at trial would have been different, given the testimony and other evidence presented by the state. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 694, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). This included eyewitness testimony of appellant’s swerving and weaving prior to striking the pedestrian victims, as well as his fleeing the scene, and his admissions, in recorded telephone calls at the jail, to drinking and driving.

DAMOORGIAN, C.J., WARNER and TAYLOR, 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 thorough order denying appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief from his convictions for vehicular manslaughter and DUI manslaughter. After a full evidentiary hearing, the trial court concluded that none of the appellant’s contentions constituted ineffective assistance of counsel. Most claims were either unproven or were shown to be reasonable trial strategy decisions by counsel and agreed to by the appellant. Moreover, competent substan *679 tial evidence supports the trial court’s conclusion that, even if all of appellant’s claims of ineffective assistance and failure to present evidence had been cured at trial, there was no reasonable probability that the results at trial would have been different, given the testimony and other evidence presented by the state. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 694, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). This included eyewitness testimony of appellant’s swerving and weaving prior to striking the pedestrian victims, as well as his fleeing the scene, and his admissions, in recorded telephone calls at the jail, to drinking and driving.

DAMOORGIAN, C.J., WARNER and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

152 So. 3d 678, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 18835, 2014 WL 6460850, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jerrold-baron-v-state-fladistctapp-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack