From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Warren v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Aug 7, 2002
825 So. 2d 999 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

Opinion

Case No. 4D02-212

Opinion filed August 7, 2002. Rehearing Denied Sept. 30, 2002.

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; Dan L. Vaughn, Judge; L.T. Case No. 97-3677 CF.

Thomas Warren, Orlando, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.


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 (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.


Summaries of

Warren v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Aug 7, 2002
825 So. 2d 999 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)
Case details for

Warren v. State

Case Details

Full title:THOMAS WARREN, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Aug 7, 2002

Citations

825 So. 2d 999 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)