Simpson v. State

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Simpson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 6216
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 26, 2017·No. 17-0668·Published

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed April 26, 2017. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D17-668 Lower Tribunal No. 08-20754A ________________

Mitchell Simpson, Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida, Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Alan S. Fine, Judge.

Mitchell Simpson, in proper person.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before ROTHENBERG, EMAS, and FERNANDEZ, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Mitchell Simpson (“the defendant”) appeals the trial court’s order denying

his motion for postconviction relief, in which he alleged four grounds that cumulatively support his claim for ineffective assistance of trial counsel, requiring

a new trial. As we conclude that the defendant’s arguments are without merit

and/or refuted by the record, and the defendant has failed to meet his burden under

Strickland v. Washington, 406 U.S. 668 (1984), we affirm.

Affirmed.

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

Simpson v. State, (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).

Simpson v. State (Simpson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.