Simpson v. State
217 So. 3d 229, 2017 WL 1492945, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 5765
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Simpson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 6216 →
Opinion
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, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), we affirm.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Simpson v. State, 217 So. 3d 229, 2017 WL 1492945, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 5765 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).
217 So. 3d 229 (Simpson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Strickland v. Washington
466 U.S. 668 (Supreme Court, 1984)