Kirkman v. State
This text of 692 So. 2d 318 (Kirkman 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.
Opinion
Vahteice KIRKMAN, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Kenneth Witts, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Lori E. Nelson, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
ANTOON, Judge.
The sole issue raised by the defendant is a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel based upon counsel's failure to file a notice of alibi as required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.200. The alleged claim of ineffectiveness of counsel is not apparent from the face of the record and therefore cannot be considered on direct appeal. Loren v. State, 601 So.2d 271, 273 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Accordingly, we affirm the defendant's judgment and sentence without prejudice to the defendant raising this claim of ineffective assistance of counsel on collateral review. See Mackey v. State, 687 So.2d 974 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997).
AFFIRMED.
GOSHORN and HARRIS, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
692 So. 2d 318, 1997 WL 216599, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kirkman-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.