Newkirk v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Newkirk v. State

898 So. 2d 228, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 3543, 2005 WL 600381

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 16, 2005

DocketNo. 4D04-236

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 898 So. 2d 228 (Newkirk 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

Newkirk v. State, 898 So. 2d 228, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 3543, 2005 WL 600381 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Mitchell Newkirk seeks reversal on direct appeal of his habitual felony offender sentence. As grounds, he argues that the evidence of his predicate convictions was insufficient because the state failed to offer expert fingerprint analysis. The state had a fingerprint expert ready to testify at the sentencing hearing; the only reason the state did not call its expert was because defense counsel indicated no fingerprint analysis was necessary.

We affirm Newkirk’s sentence because defense counsel’s conduct at the hearing was tantamount to a concession that no error occurred. This is, of course, without prejudice to Newkirk filing a 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief.

Affirmed.

STONE, GROSS and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

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