Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Moore v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided November 14, 2003No. 2D03-606Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partFulmer, Judge

In his motion, Moore raised three grounds, two of which the majority concludes the trial court properly denied. I join the majority in this conclusion. However, I do not agree that the trial court erred by denying Moore’s claim of ineffective assistance for failure of his counsel to move for a severance.

In order to obtain relief on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must “show that counsel’s performance was deficient” and that “the deficient performance prejudiced the defense.” Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). “It is…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Cherry v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API