Scottie McMULLEN, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Jack R. Maro, Ocala, for Appellant.
Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Robin A. Cоmpton, Assistant *590 Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
SHARP, W., J.
McMullen appeals from his judgment and sentences for sale of cocaine within 1,000 feеt of a place of worship[1] and possession of cocaine with intent to sell or deliver within 1,000 feet of a place of worship.[2] He raises three points on appeal. We affirm.
First, McMullen claims he was denied effective assistance of counsel and a fair trial resulting from prosecutorial misconduct compounded by deficiencies of trial counsel. With rare exceptions, ineffective assistance of trial counsel claims are nоt cognizable on direct appeal. Gore v. State,
Second, McMullen contends that the trial judge departed from his rоle as a neutral arbiter and, instead, acted as a second prosecutor by assisting the state аnd rectifying the shortcomings in the state's case. See Gamble v. State,
Third, McMullen contends his convictions for salе of cocaine and possession of the sаme cocaine with intent to sell or deliver, violates double jeopardy. The Florida Supreme Court answered this question in State v. McCloud,
AFFIRMED.
THOMPSON and MONACO, JJ., concur.
NOTES
Notes
[1] § 893.13(1)(e)1., Fla. Stat.
[2] § 893.13(1)(e)1., Fla. Stat.
