CATRICA CLIFTON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 5th DCA | 2006-06-06
No. 5D06-1105
THOMPSON, MONACO and TORPY, JJ., concur.
931 So. 2d 996 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2006) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See Hill v. State, 813 So. 2d 274 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), Nowell v. State, 742 So. 2d 345 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999).

THOMPSON, MONACO and TORPY, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Tiras Hardy v. State, 994 So. 2d 1107 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)
    …PER CURIAM. Affirmed. State v. Dickey, 928 So. 2d 1193, 1198 (Fla.2006); Hogan v. State, 931 So. 2d 996 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006).…
  • Tapanes v. State, 14 So. 3d 1143 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)
    …gone the plea and proceeded to trial. As such, Defendant alleges that his counsel provided affirmative misadvice as to the direct consequences of his plea. In denying Defendant’s motion, the trial court concluded that “[p]ursuant to Hogan v. State, 931 So. 2d 996 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006), [counsel’s] misadvice regarding the collateral future sentence-enhancing consequence of a plea is not a cognizable claim.” This appeal ensued. We affirm the trial court’s denial of the Defendant’s post-conviction motion based on…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw