Florida District Courts of Appeal, 1994

Steele v. State

Steele v. State
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided April 20, 1994 · Anstead, Glickstein, Pariente
634 So. 2d 827; 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 3820; 1994 WL 138333 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Steele v. State

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s denial of appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief. On the issue of counsel’s alleged “promise” as to appellant’s eligibility for gain time, the record reflects appellant’s acknowledgment at his plea hearing that no “promises,” other than those referred to at the plea hearing, had been made to him by anyone. This is sufficient to support a denial of his claim. See Zaetler v. State, 627 So.2d 1328 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993).

ANSTEAD, GLICKSTEIN and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.