Rawls v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Rawls v. State

834 So. 2d 940, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 440, 2003 WL 141301

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 22, 2003·No. No. 2D02-836·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

SILBERMAN, Judge.

Anthony P. Rawls appeals his conviction and sentence for lewd molestation. He argues that the trial court should have granted his motion for mistrial and that he is entitled to a new trial due to the ineffective assistance of his trial counsel. The State cross-appeals the trial court’s order granting Rawls’ motion in limine to exclude Williams¹ rule evidence. We affirm as to all issues without comment except to note that our decision is without prejudice to Rawls’ filing a timely, legally sufficient motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 3.850 on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel.

Affirmed.

NORTHCUTT and THREADGILL, EDWARD F., Senior Judge, Concur.

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

SILBERMAN, Judge.

Anthony P. Rawls appeals his conviction and sentence for lewd molestation. He argues that the trial court should have granted his motion for mistrial and that he is entitled to a new trial due to the ineffective assistance of his trial counsel. The State cross-appeals the trial court’s order granting Rawls’ motion in limine to exclude Williams¹ rule evidence. We affirm as to all issues without comment except to note that our decision is without prejudice to Rawls’ filing a timely, legally sufficient motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 3.850 on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel.

Affirmed.

NORTHCUTT and THREADGILL, EDWARD F., Senior Judge, Concur.

Rawls v. State, 834 So. 2d 940, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 440, 2003 WL 141301 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

834 So. 2d 940 (Rawls v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related