Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Watson v. State

Watson v. State

861 So. 2d 509, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 18753, 2003 WL 22902255
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Watson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 842 So. 2d 275 →
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 10, 2003·No. No. 4D03-2736·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We deny this Petition for Writ of Habe-as Corpus alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. It was not ineffective for counsel to forego arguing the propriety of the trial court’s denial of Watson’s Motion to Suppress, as that issue had not been preserved where trial counsel failed to make a contemporaneous objection. Moreover, even if the issue had been preserved, it would have been without merit. The record amply supports the denial of the suppression motion on the merits.

FARMER, C.J., POLEN and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

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

Watson v. State, 861 So. 2d 509, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 18753, 2003 WL 22902255 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

861 So. 2d 509 (Watson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.