WILLIAMS v. STATE (2002)

District Court of Appeal of Florida,Third District.

Mario Alphonso WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D00-3417.

Decided: February 20, 2002

Before GREEN, SORONDO, and RAMIREZ, JJ.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Billie Jan Goldstein, Assistant Public Defender, for appellee. Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General and Roberta G. Mandel, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Mario Alphonso Williams appeals the denial of his post-conviction Rule 3.850, Fla. R.Crim. P. motion in which he asserted that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to call two defense witnesses in support of his allegations of self-defense at trial. After reviewing competent, substantial evidence adduced at the evidentiary hearing conducted below, we conclude that the trial court properly concluded that the actions of Williams' trial counsel were strategic or tactical decisions made with the best interest of Williams in mind. It follows that such decisions do not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); Valle v. State, 778 So.2d 960 (Fla.2001); Shere v. State, 742 So.2d 215 (Fla.1999); Ford v. State, 776 So.2d 373 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001).

Affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network