Kilpatrick v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kilpatrick v. State

422 So. 2d 934, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21559

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 3, 1982

DocketNo. AL-359

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 422 So. 2d 934 (Kilpatrick 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

Kilpatrick v. State, 422 So. 2d 934, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21559 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

MILLS, Judge.

Kilpatrick appeals the trial court’s summary denial of his motion for post-convic[935]*935tion relief. Rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. We affirm.

The first ground for relief raised by Kilpatrick was previously raised on direct appeal. Kilpatrick v. State, 402 So.2d 618 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). Therefore, it cannot form the basis for collateral attack.

In his second ground for relief, Kil-patrick alleges that certain of his constitutional rights were violated at trial. We find that this is a matter which could have been raised on direct appeal. “The fact that the basis of the defendant’s collateral attack is alleged to be one of constitutional dimension does not preclude a waiver by the failure to assert it on direct appeal.” Roth v. State, 385 So.2d 114, 115 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).

Finally, Kilpatrick’s allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel are insufficient under Knight v. State, 394 So.2d 997 (Fla.1981).

AFFIRMED.

ERVIN and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.

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