Linear Harden v. State of Florida

MAY, J. The defendant appeals his conviction and sentence for grand theft over $100,000. He raises a single issue, with multiple subparts, of ineffective assistance of counsel. “Generally, claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are not cognizable on direct appeal.” Gould v. State, 137 So.3d 524, 524 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). “An exception exists ‘only in the rare case where both prongs of Strickland — the error and the prejudice — are manifest in the record.’ ” Id. (emphasis added) (footnote omitted) (quoting Boyd v. State, 45 So.3d 557, 560 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)). This exception is rarely applicable because “[s]ueh claims ordinarily turn on issues of fact and both sides are entitled to present relevant evidence to the trial court to resolve those issues.” Gordon v. State, 469 So.2d 795, 798 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985) (An-stead, C.J., concurring specially). *183 This case does not fall within the exception. We therefore affirm without prejudice to the defendant raising his claim in a motion, pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Affirmed ivithout prejudice. KLINGENSMITH, J., and ROBY, WILLIAM L., Associate Judge, concur.