GIL v. STATE (2025)

Roberto Gil appeals the denial of his timely-filed motion for postconviction relief. We have reviewed the trial court's meticulous treatment of the Appellant's claims, which included an opportunity for Appellant to supplement his pleading after the trial court found them inadequate, carefully determining Appellant had met the first but not second prong of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), conducting evidentiary hearings on certain points where appropriate, preparing a scholarly and insightful seventeen-page order setting forth its reasoning and fact-findings, granting full relief on one of Appellant's claims and resetting that charge for trial, and denying relief on the others. Finding no error, we affirm.

Affirmed.

PER CURIAM.