THOMAS MARTONE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 2007-06-27
No. 4D05-4064
WARNER, KLEIN and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
959 So. 2d 1240 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2007) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Thomas Martone appeals the denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The sole issue before the trial court at the evidentiary hearing on the motion was whether Martone’s trial attorney rendered ineffective assistance by failing to properly advise him of the consequences of declining a lenient plea offer allegedly made by the state. The trial court denied the njotion based on the court’s finding that the state had not made any plea offers. The prosecutor unequivocally testified that he had not made a plea offer. Thus, although the evidence was conflicting, this court must defer to the trial court’s factual finding on this point, as it was supported by competent substantial evidence. See Stephens v. State, 748 So. 2d 1028, 1033-34 (Fla.1999).

Affirmed.

WARNER, KLEIN and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Watkins v. State, 224 So. 3d 256 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)
    …onclude that the issue of whether the photographic lineup procedure was §o. unduly suggestive so as to give rise to a substantial likelihood of a mis-identification has not been preserved for appellate review on direct appeal. See Camerota v. State, 959 So. 2d 1240, 1242 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (“Generally, to obtain appellate review qf a guilty or no contest plea, the defendant must specifically reserve dispositive issues for appeal in the trial court,”). . “Be on the look out.”…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw