Case Name: Stanley GRONTKOWSKI, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2005-02-23
Citations: 897 So. 2d 497
Docket Number: No. 4D03-2344
Parties: Stanley GRONTKOWSKI, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.
Judges: GUNTHER, POLEN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 897
Pages: 497–498

Head Matter:
Stanley GRONTKOWSKI, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.
No. 4D03-2344.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Feb. 23, 2005.
Rehearing Denied April 12, 2005.
Robert G. Udell, Stuart, for petitioner.
No appearance required for respondent.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, alleging ineffective assistance of his appellate counsel. We note the attorney who handled petitioner's direct appeal was also his trial counsel. Petitioner argues that appellate counsel should have argued points which were not preserved at trial by contemporaneous objection or motion. This is not ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. Richards v. State, 809 So.2d 38 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). Nor do these alleged errors rise to the level of fundamental error. See, e.g., York v. State, 731 So.2d 802 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).
We reject petitioner's argument that failure to argue on appeal any of the objected-to issues constituted ineffective assistance, because such would not have changed the outcome of the appeal. Spencer v. State, 842 So.2d 52 (Fla.2003). Accordingly, we deny the petition without prejudice to file a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.
GUNTHER, POLEN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.