AARON KEITH MARSH, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Dna Testing cases and more on FLexlaw
FLETCHER, Judge.
Aaron Keith Marsh appeals from the lower court’s denial of post-conviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.
In Marsh’s current (his third) post-conviction motion, he requests among other things that the rape kit evidence introduced at trial on a sexual battery charge be released for DNA testing. While we would be sympathetic to DNA testing in a case where it would be of value, this is not such a case. Marsh’s request for DNA testing of the rape kit evidence is without merit, as any results would be superfluous because Marsh admitted that he was the person who had sexual intercourse with the victim. Marsh’s unsuccessful defense at trial had been one of consensual sex, not identity. See § 925.11(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2001); Hartline v. State, 806 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); Galloway v. State, 802 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Robinson v. State, 865 So. 2d 1259 (Fla. 2004)…hat the first shot was accidental and took place after the two engaged in consensual sex. See Robinson v. Moore, 300 F. 3d 1320, 1323-26 (11th Cir.2002). Thus, his identity and physical contact with the decedent are not at issue. See Marsh v. State, 812 So. 2d 579, 579 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (holding that DNA testing of rape kit would be superfluous because the defendant’s unsuccessful defense at trial was consensual sex and not identity). Because Robinson failed to meet his burden under rule 3.853 to allege with…
-
Saffold v. State, 850 So. 2d 574 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…o say that the victims identified him and the composite sketch of the suspect, introduced by the State, did not resemble him. Saffold does not indicate whether he raised a misidentification defense or any other defenses at trial. See Marsh v. State, 812 So. 2d 579 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (holding that movant was not entitled to DNA testing where defense at trial had been one of consensual sex, not identity). Although not explicitly stated in subsection (b)(1) of the rule, the statement of the facts relied on shou…
-
Jefferson v. State, 919 So. 2d 541 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Marsh v. State, 812 So. 2d 579 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).…
Authorities Cited
- Baker v. State, 802 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
- Hartline v. State, 806 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)