Gallo v. State

Appellant has raised claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, involuntary plea induced by promises of counsel regarding control release date and reduced probationary sentencing, and a claim of violation of double jeopardy. Appellant’s claim of violation of double jeopardy appears to have been properly rejected by the trial court. See United States v. Ursery, — U.S. —, 116 S.Ct. 2135, 135 L.Ed.2d 549 (1996); Chillington v. State, 682 So.2d 1137 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); State v. Powelson, 680 So.2d 1089 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). His claims of ineffective assistance of counsel fail to satisfy the…