RUSH v. STATE (2021)

The petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel is denied on the merits. See Johnson v. Wainwright, 463 So. 2d 207, 209 (Fla. 1985) (holding that to establish ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a defendant must show that counsel's alleged error or omission was “of such magnitude that it can be said that they deviated from the norm or fell outside the range of professionally acceptable performance” and “the deficiency caused prejudicial impact on the appellant by compromising the appellate process to such a degree as to undermine confidence in the fairness and correctness of the outcome”); see also Brown v. State, 124 So. 2d 481, 484 (Fla. 1960) (holding that for an error to fundamental, “the error must reach down into the validity of the trial itself to the extent that a verdict of guilty could not have been obtained without the assistance of the alleged error”).

Per Curiam.

Roberts, Rowe, and Jay, JJ., concur.