Case Name: Oscar HERRERA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1993-11-30
Citations: 627 So. 2d 559
Docket Number: No. 93-2637
Parties: Oscar HERRERA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and NESBITT and GODERICH, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 627
Pages: 559–559

Head Matter:
Oscar HERRERA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 93-2637.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Nov. 30, 1993.
Rehearing Denied Jan. 6, 1994.
Oscar Herrera, in pro. per.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., for ap-pellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and NESBITT and GODERICH, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We agree with the following order under review:
The Defendant has moved this Court for post conviction relief pursuant to Rule 3.850 of the Fla.R.Crim.P. alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, and the Court being fully advised in the premises hereby denies this motion and finds as follows:
The District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District, on direct appeal found no error in Defendant's convictions by a jury in this case. [Herrera v. State, 570 So.2d 1129 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) ]
The grounds outlined by Defendant in his motion do not satisfy the requirements of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). Those deficiencies alleged, if they are deficiencies, do not demonstrate the required prejudice to the Defendant. See Squires v. State, 558 So.2d 401 (Fla.1990); State v. Gibson, 557 So.2d 929 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990).
Affirmed.