Opinion ID: 1697443
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 10

Heading: Codefendant's Case

Text: Gamble claims that appellate counsel did not thoroughly argue that his sentence was disproportionate to his codefendant's sentence and that he could have made other arguments on appeal. [2] The disproportionality claim was presented on direct appeal and was rejected. See Gamble v. State, 659 So.2d 242, 245 (Fla.1995) (finding that it would be improper to speculate as to what might have occurred had Gamble's jury been made aware of the posture of the codefendant's case). A habeas petition is not the proper vehicle to argue a variant of an already decided issue. See Jones v. Moore, 794 So.2d 579, 586 (Fla.2001); Thompson v. State, 759 So.2d 650, 657 n. 6 (Fla.2000). Thus, we deny habeas relief on this claim.