DAVID R. KEEN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Recantation Of Testimony cases and more on FLexlaw
[*118] KELLY, Judge.
David R. Keen appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm without discussion as to six of Keen’s claims, but we reverse and remand on his remaining claim.
In his motion, Keen alleged that the State’s main witness recanted his testimony inculpating Keen for first-degree murder. The trial court denied this claim because, although Keen attached a letter from the witness to his motion, he did not provide a notarized statement from the recanting witness. However, Keen is not required to provide such a statement; he must only provide a brief statement of facts in support of the motion. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850; Smith v. State, 837 So. 2d 1185 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). Keen claimed that the recanting witness originally testified that Keen admitted to planning the murder. He further alleged that absent this testimony the State would have been unable to prove the premeditated intent required for first-degree murder. These allegations are legally sufficient to state a prima facie claim of newly discovered evidence based upon the recantation of trial testimony. See McLin v. State, 827 So. 2d 948 (Fla.2002); Padron v. State, 827 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Smith, 837 So. 2d at 1186. Because the allegations are not refuted by the record, we reverse and remand for the trial court to either hold an evidentiary hearing or attach portions of the record which conclusively refute Keen’s claim.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
DAVIS and VILLANTI, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Roundtree v. State, 884 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)…y would have refuted the State’s argument that Roundtree acted as a lookout during the robbery. These allegations are sufficient to state a prima facie claim of newly discovered evidence. See McLin v. State, 827 So. 2d 948 (Fla.2002); Keen v. State, 855 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). It appears that the trial court denied Roundtree’s claim because he failed to attach an affidavit. However, rule 3.850 does not require the filing of supporting affidavits; it only requires a brief statement of facts in support o…
-
Butler v. State, 946 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…ructure or conveyance. Butler’s motion is facially sufficient to state a claim of newly discovered evidence based on the recantation by the State’s key witnesses of their trial testimony. See McLin v. State, 827 So. 2d 948 (Fla.2002); Keen v. State, 855 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). The postconviction court denied Butler’s claim on the ground that the affidavit from Kassis was not sufficient to show that her son was recanting his trial testimony. At this stage in the proceedings, Kassis’ affidavit asserting…
-
Davis v. State, 15 So. 3d 770 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…or relief based upon the legal and factual grounds asserted.” Jacobs v. State, 880 So. 2d 548, 550 (Fla.2004). He was not required to provide the court with documentary evidence that he had successfully completed boot camp. Cf., e.g., Keen v. State, 855 So. 2d 117, 118 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (noting that the movant was not required to provide a notarized statement supporting his allegations; “he must only provide a brief statement of facts in support of the motion”); Simon v. State, 997 So. 2d 490, 492 (Fla. 4th…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- McLIN v. State, 827 So. 2d 948 (Fla. 2002)
- Kossow v. Snapp Indus., Inc., 837 So. 2d 1185 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)
- Padron v. State, 827 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)