David Leggett, Appellant, v. The State of Florida, Appellee. (2024)

Affirmed. See Arbelaez v. State, 898 So. 2d 25, 32 (Fla. 2005) (“So long as the [trial court's] decisions are supported by competent, substantial evidence, this Court will not substitute its judgment for that of the trial court on questions of fact and, likewise, on the credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be given to the evidence.” (citation omitted) (insertion in original)); Melendez v. State, 718 So. 2d 746, 747-48 (Fla. 1998) (same); Jones v. State, 709 So. 2d 512, 521 (Fla. 1998) (finding that “[t]wo requirements must be met for a conviction to be set aside based on newly discovered evidence[:] First, ․ the evidence ‘must have been unknown by the trial court, by the party, or by counsel at the time of trial, and it must appear that defendant or his counsel could not have known [of it] by the use of due diligence.’ Second, the newly discovered evidence must be of such nature that it would probably produce an acquittal on retrial.” (internal citation omitted) (insertion in original)); Schofield v. State, 311 So. 3d 918, 921 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020) (affirming that new evidence is “unlikely to produce an acquittal on retrial” if it is not credible); State v. Riechmann, 777 So. 2d 342, 360 (Fla. 2000) (stating that testimony of newly discovered witnesses is untrustworthy when the witnesses’ statements are “ ‘rife with inconsistencies’ with [d]efendant's own testimony at trial”); Alcorn v. State, 121 So. 3d 419, 422 (Fla. 2013) (providing the test to determine whether counsel's performance was unreasonable when a plea agreement has been offered by the state is the defendant must prove that “counsel's performance was deficient,” and the defendant must demonstrate that the “deficient performance prejudiced [the defendant]”); Mendoza v. State, 81 So. 3d 579, 580-81 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) (holding that upon defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel after his attorney failed to call certain witnesses at trial, where defendant was colloquied by the trial court and when asked if he agreed with his counsel's decision not to call other witnesses, the defendant affirmatively agreed with his counsel's strategy, this Court stated defendant's express agreement to his attorney's decision during colloquy was “fatal to his claim of ineffective assistance counsel”); Ritchie v. State, 344 So. 3d 369, 378 (Fla. 2002) (stating that to be preserved for review, “the issue or legal argument must be raised and ruled on by the trial court” (citation omitted) (emphasis in original)).

PER CURIAM.