Case Name: Joseph GORMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1999-06-17
Citations: 738 So. 2d 966
Docket Number: No. 98-1130
Parties: Joseph GORMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: BARFIELD, C.J, and BOOTH, J., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 738
Pages: 966–967

Head Matter:
Joseph GORMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 98-1130.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
June 17, 1999.
Harold S. Richmond, Quincy, for appellant.
Robert A.’ Butterworth, Attorney General; Kristina White, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for appellee.

Opinion:
WOLF, J.
Joseph Gorman argues that the trial court erred in denying his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 postconviction motion after an evidentiary hearing. He asserts that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to interview a proposed medical witness prior to his trial on capital sexual battery charges. While we agree with appellant that he demonstrated that his counsel's performance was deficient, no evidence was presented that the doctor would have been available to testify at trial or that he would have testified in a manner favorable to the defense. See State v. Hanania, 715 So.2d 984, 986 (Fla. 2d DCA)(reversing trial court order granting new trial on claim of ineffective assistance of counsel predicated on counsel's failure to call a codefendant and confidential informant as defense witnesses because defendant had failed to present any evidence at evidentiary hearing establishing what the confidential informant's and codefendant's testimony would have been), rev. denied, 727 So.2d 905 (Fla.1998). We, therefore, affirm.
BARFIELD, C.J, and BOOTH, J., concur.