Nixon v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Nixon v. State

637 So. 2d 935, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 4321, 1994 WL 169147

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 4, 1994

DocketNo. 94-00394

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 637 So. 2d 935 (Nixon 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

Nixon v. State, 637 So. 2d 935, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 4321, 1994 WL 169147 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

ALTENBERND, Judge.

The state has moved for rehearing in this ease. In our initial opinion, which has been withdrawn, we reversed the denial of a motion for postconviction relief and remanded for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether James Jones Nixon received ineffective assistance of counsel. Specifically, Mr. Nixon maintained that his attorney refused to allow him to testify. See Gill v. State, 632 So.2d 660 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994).

On motion for rehearing, the state has brought to our attention that the motion for postconviction relief was denied after an evi-dentiary hearing. The transcript of that hearing has now been filed, and it appears that the trial court properly denied the motion for postconviction relief after receiving the evidence needed to satisfy Gill. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s order denying postconviction relief.

Affirmed.

BLUE and FULMER, JJ., concur.

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