Skipwith v. State

934 So. 2d 544, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 8560, 2006 WL 1476127
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 31, 2006
DocketNo. 4D04-3581
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 934 So. 2d 544 (Skipwith 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
Skipwith v. State, 934 So. 2d 544, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 8560, 2006 WL 1476127 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

On Motion foe ClaRification

PER CURIAM.

Appellant’s motion for clarification is hereby granted, and we clarify that this court’s per curiam affirmance of this case is without prejudice to appellant’s raising his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Appellant’s motion for rehearing is denied.

POLEN, KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Brigham v. Brigham
934 So. 2d 544 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
934 So. 2d 544, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 8560, 2006 WL 1476127, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/skipwith-v-state-fladistctapp-2006.