Whether the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals erred

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Whether the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals erred by ruling DiSanto’s lawyer was not OO ‘ineffective by failing to bring to the attention of the trial court parsuant to Rule 3.172(g), Florida . Rules of Criminal Procedure that withdrawal of his plea was mandatory before “formal acceptance of plea” even if his lawyer believed reasonably that the trial court had accepted his plea, contrary to the Strickland v. Washington, standard?! Whether the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals erred by ruling that the trail judge’s words were sufficient to constitute formal acceptance of DiSanto’s plea for purposes of Rule 3.172(g) by relying upon the dictates of Campbell v. State, 125 So.3d 733, 740-41 (Fla. 2013) without violating the Ex Post Facto Law of Article 1, section 10, secured through Article 14 of the United States Constitution? i ' Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. _, 104 S. Ct. 2052,