LUMPKIN v. STATE (2023)

Johnny Lumpkin appeals the denial of his motion for postconviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The motion alleged seven grounds for relief. The postconviction court granted an evidentiary hearing on three of those grounds.

“If there was an evidentiary hearing, as there was here, this Court defers to the postconviction court's factual findings, credibility decisions, and weight determinations.” Grandison v. State, 276 So. 3d 43, 45 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019). The postconviction court made a credibility determination in favor of Appellant's counsel and against Appellant. That finding is supported by competent, substantial evidence. See Moore v. State, 132 So. 3d 718, 727 (Fla. 2013) (“Where the postconviction court's factual findings and credibility determinations are supported by competent, substantial evidence, this Court will defer to its findings because the postconviction court has a ‘superior vantage point in assessing the credibility of witnesses and in making findings of fact.’ ”) (quoting Porter v. State, 788 So. 2d 917, 923 (Fla. 2001)). The denial of Appellant's motion for postconviction relief is therefore Affirmed.

Per Curiam.

Osterhaus, C.J., and Kelsey and Long, JJ., concur.