LARRY LEATHERWOOD, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the record did not conclusively show the appellant was entitled to no relief regarding claims of witness recantation.
Appellant appealed the summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief. His motion included claims based on alleged recantation of a trial wit…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Witness Recantation cases and more on FLexlaw
Larry Leatherwood appeals an order summarily denying his motion for post-conviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 without an evi-dentiary hearing. On appeal from a summary denial, this court must reverse unless the post-conviction record, see Fla. R.App. P. 9.141(b)(2)(A), shows conclusively that the appellant is entitled to no relief. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.141(b)(2)(D).
Because the record before us fails to make the required showing with respect to Leatherwood’s two claims based on the alleged recantation of a trial witness’ testimony (newly discovered evidence of witness recantation and presentation of false testimony), we reverse the order on appeal for the attachment of record excerpts conclusively showing that the appellant is not entitled to relief, or for an evidentiary hearing.1 See Fla. R.App. P. 9.141(b)(2)(D). We affirm the remaining two claims raised in the post-conviction motion without discussion, finding them to be without merit.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Leatherwood v. State, 168 So. 3d 328 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)…reversed a summary denial of Leatherwood’s 3.850 motion and remanded the case to the trial court either to hold an evidentiary hearing or to attach record excerpts to show that Leatherwood’s claims were not entitled to relief. Leatherwood v. State, 75 So. 3d 369 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)(Mem). The trial court then conducted an evi-dentiary hearing, and found that the witness did not recant her testimony. Leath-erwood appealed. This Court affirmed the trial court’s order in Leatherwood v. State, 141 So. 3d 191 (Fl…