Sweet v. State

377 So. 2d 48, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 16123
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 28, 1979·No. No. PP-149·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Sweet appeals the order denying his motion for post-conviction relief entered without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. Sweet’s claim that he was denied his right to counsel at a critical stage because he appeared at a pre-indictment line-up without counsel was previously raised and considered on his direct appeal. Sweet v. State, 296 So.2d 672 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974). Therefore, this claim does not set forth a ground for post-conviction relief. Pitts v. State, 355 So.2d 505 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). Moreover, under the circumstances presented in this case, Sweet was not entitled to counsel at the line-up. State v. Bragg, 371 So.2d 1080 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979). Accordingly, the order denying Sweet’s motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentia-ry hearing is affirmed.

McCORD, Acting C. J., and LARRY G. SMITH and SHIVERS, JJ., concur.

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

Sweet v. State, 377 So. 2d 48, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 16123 (Fla. Ct. App. 1979).

377 So. 2d 48 (Sweet v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pitts v. State
355 So. 2d 505 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1978)
State v. Bragg
371 So. 2d 1080 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1979)
Sweet v. State
296 So. 2d 672 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1974)