Williams v. State

Appellant seeks review of an order denying him relief pursuant to CrRP 1.850, 33 F.S.A. His petition alleged that he was hot effectively represented by counsel at trial by stating: “[T]hat defense counsel was inadequate and did not represent the defendant’s best interests.” The basis of this contention rests on the fact that the record does not disclose any interview between appellant’s appointed counsel and the appellant prior to the trial.

However, the record does show that the appellant had been represented by private counsel prior to the trial stage; that the public defender was ready to…