Lewis v. State
938 So. 2d 579, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 15453, 2006 WL 2683391
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Lewis v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 874 So. 2d 18 →
Opinion
This is an appeal from a finding that appellant violated his probation. We affirm the finding that appellant was competent at the VOP hearing. Hardy v. State, 716 So.2d 761 (Fla.1998) (where there is conflicting expert testimony regarding defendant’s competency, it is the trial court’s responsibility to resolve the factual dispute). We decline to address appellant’s contention that his counsel was ineffective for not raising the issue of his competency during the VOP hearing on this direct appeal.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Lewis v. State, 938 So. 2d 579, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 15453, 2006 WL 2683391 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).
938 So. 2d 579 (Lewis v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hardy v. State
716 So. 2d 761 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1998)