From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Timothy Clarke v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Aug 10, 2010
40 So. 3d 768 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

Opinion

No. 3D07-3056.

August 19, 2009. Rehearing Denied August 10, 2010.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jorge J. Perez, Judge.

Paul Morris, Miami, for appellant.

Bill McCollum, Attorney General, and Natalia Costea, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before COPE and SALTER, JJ., and SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.


This is an appeal from the denial, after an evidentiary hearing, of a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion claiming ineffective assistance of counsel in the trial resulting in the judgment affirmed in Clarke v. State, 838 So.2d 1163 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003) (table). While the issue of whether counsel's representation fell below the required standard may present at least an arguable position, we find that the post-conviction court did not err in concluding that the second prong of the Strickland standard, cognizable prejudice, had not been satisfied. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); Maxwell v. Wainwright, 490 So.2d 927 (Fla. 1986); Ridel v. State, 990 So.2d 581 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008); Giralt v. State, 935 So.2d 599 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Timothy Clarke v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Aug 10, 2010
40 So. 3d 768 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)
Case details for

Timothy Clarke v. State

Case Details

Full title:Jason Timothy CLARKE, Appellant v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Aug 10, 2010

Citations

40 So. 3d 768 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)