Steele v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Steele v. State

634 So. 2d 827, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 3820, 1994 WL 138333

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 20, 1994

DocketNo. 93-3812

StatusPublished

This text of 634 So. 2d 827 (Steele 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

Steele v. State, 634 So. 2d 827, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 3820, 1994 WL 138333 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s denial of appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief. On the issue of counsel’s alleged “promise” as to appellant’s eligibility for gain time, the record reflects appellant’s acknowledgment at his plea hearing that no “promises,” other than those referred to at the plea hearing, had been made to him by anyone. This is sufficient to support a denial of his claim. See Zaetler v. State, 627 So.2d 1328 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993).

ANSTEAD, GLICKSTEIN and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s denial of appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief. On the issue of counsel’s alleged “promise” as to appellant’s eligibility for gain time, the record reflects appellant’s acknowledgment at his plea hearing that no “promises,” other than those referred to at the plea hearing, had been made to him by anyone. This is sufficient to support a denial of his claim. See Zaetler v. State, 627 So.2d 1328 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993).

ANSTEAD, GLICKSTEIN and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

634 So. 2d 827, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 3820, 1994 WL 138333, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/steele-v-state-fladistctapp-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack