RAMONA TAVIA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 2005-05-04
No. 3D04-415
Before COPE, WELLS, and ROTHENBERG, JJ.
909 So. 2d 910 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2005) Positive Treatment
Cited by 9 cases
Opinion of the Court
WELLS, Judge.

WELLS, Judge.

Ramona Tavia appeals from the denial of a 3.850 motion following an evidentiary hearing on Tavia’s claim that newly discovered evidence entitled her to a new trial. We affirm because the trial court’s conclusion that the new evidence lacks credibility is supported by competent substantial evidence. See Jones v. State, 709 So. 2d 512, 521-22 (Fla.1998) (stating that in determining whether newly discovered evidence would probably produce an acquittal on retrial, a trial court must consider both admissibility and the weight to be accorded to the new evidence); Blanco v. State, 702 So. 2d 1250, 1252 (Fla.1997) (stating that a lower court’s credibility determinations will not be overturned if supported by competent substantial evidence).

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Thigpen v. United Parcel Servs., Inc., 990 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)
    …at reversible error has been committed. Id. (citing Collins Fruit Co. v. Giglio, 184 So. 2d 447 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)); see also Midtown Enters., Inc. v. Local Contractors, Inc., 785 So. 2d 578, 580 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001); Krolick v. Monroe ex rel. Monroe, 909 So. 2d 910, 914 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). “When reviewing the order granting a new trial, an appellate court must recognize the broad discretionary authority of the trial judge and apply the reasonableness test to determine whether the trial judge committed an abus…
  • Allard v. Al-Nayem Int'l, Inc., 59 So. 3d 198 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011)
    …review is abuse of discretion. Campagna v. Cope, 971 So. 2d 243, 251 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). However, we apply this standard in a re [*202] stricted manner because the reason for granting the rehearing involves a question of law. See Krolick v. Monroe, 909 So. 2d 910, 913-14 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Bulkmatic Transp. Co. v. Taylor, 860 So. 2d 436, 444 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). The trial court relied on MCI WorldCom Network Services, Inc. v. Mastec, Inc., 995 So. 2d 221, 223 (Fla.2008), for the proposition that “[generall…
  • Maynard v. The Fla. Bd. OF Educ., 998 So. 2d 1201 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)
    …ng the disposition of the federal case was relevant as to the University’s counterclaim. The trial court must now determine the relevance and admissibility of this evidence with regard to Maynard’s claims alone. See Krolick v. Monroe ex rel. Monroe, 909 So. 2d 910, 914 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (“The trial judge who must decide whether to grant a new trial on the proffered ground that some reversible error of law occurred at some point during the trial need only ask himself if there was error and if so whether the e…

Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw