Warren v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Warren v. State

825 So. 2d 999, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 11273, 2002 WL 1798924

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 7, 2002

DocketNo. 4D02-212

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 825 So. 2d 999 (Warren 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

Warren v. State, 825 So. 2d 999, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 11273, 2002 WL 1798924 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s order denying appellant’s motion for postconviction relief. Appellant contends that his counsel was ineffective in failing to investigate the case, failing to move to suppress evidence seized in a search, and failing to take depositions or prepare for trial. He attaches a letter from counsel indicating that appellant’s father retained counsel for the sole purpose of negotiating a plea. Therefore, the record suggests that counsel failed to investigate the case. However, he has not shown how counsel’s various failures would have resulted in the prejudice required under the analysis of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 686-87, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

We commend the trial court for its thorough analysis of each of the issues in this case, which has facilitated our review.

Affirmed.

STONE, WARNER and HAZOURI, 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 order denying appellant’s motion for postconviction relief. Appellant contends that his counsel was ineffective in failing to investigate the case, failing to move to suppress evidence seized in a search, and failing to take depositions or prepare for trial. He attaches a letter from counsel indicating that appellant’s father retained counsel for the sole purpose of negotiating a plea. Therefore, the record suggests that counsel failed to investigate the case. However, he has not shown how counsel’s various failures would have resulted in the prejudice required under the analysis of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 686-87, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

We commend the trial court for its thorough analysis of each of the issues in this case, which has facilitated our review.

Affirmed.

STONE, WARNER and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

825 So. 2d 999, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 11273, 2002 WL 1798924, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/warren-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack