ANTHONY JONES, 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.
Anthony Jones appeals the summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief based on newly discovered evidence—an affidavit from his former co-defendant Gibbs stating Jones did not hire him to commit the crimes for which Jones was convicted. The appellate court reverses and remands for an evidentiary hearing based on the Nordelo standard.
The affidavit constitutes newly discovered evidence legally sufficient to require an evidentiary hearing. The trial court erred in summarily denying the motion without a hearing.
[1] A motion for post-conviction relief alleging newly discovered evidence warrants an evidentiary hearing when the motion is legally sufficient.
[2] Newly discovered evidence may include testimony from a co-defendant who previously invoked the Fifth Amendment at trial.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Jones never asked me to commit the alleged crime, did not pay or promise[] to pay me, nor was involved with me on this offense”
The substance of Gibbs' affidavit, directly contradicting the State's trial theory that Jones hired Gibbs to commit the crimes
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJones and Gibbs were charged as co-defendants with first-degree murder and attempted first-degree murder in 2003. At Jones' December 2008 trial, Gibbs…
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 Fifth Amendment Right Against Self-Incrimination cases and more on FLexlaw
Anthony Jones (“Jones”) appeals from the summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief alleging newly discovered evidence. Pursuant to Nordelo v. State, 93 So.3d 178 (Fla.2012), we reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
In February 2011, pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, Jones filed a motion for postconviction relief which raised a single claim i.e., that the proffered testimony of a former co-defendant, Jeffery Gibbs (“Gibbs”), was newly-discovered evidence, and warranted an evi-dentiary hearing and a new trial.
In 2003, Jones and Gibbs were charged as co-defendants with one count of first-degree murder and one count of attempted first-degree murder. Their cases were severed for trial and, in December 2008, Jones’ case proceeded to trial first. Gibbs, acting on the advice of counsel and invoking his Fifth Amendment right, did not testify at Jones’ trial, as he was still awaiting his own trial on the same charges. At Jones’ trial, the State proceeded on the theory that Jones hired and paid Gibbs to commit the crimes. Jones was convicted of both charges; he was sentenced to life in prison on the murder charge and fifteen years on the attempted murder charge. His convictions and sentences were affirmed per curiam on direct appeal. See Jones v. State, 41 So.3d 907 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (table decision).
Gibbs went to trial in February 2009 and was found not guilty of the charges.
In January 2011, Gibbs provided Jones with a sworn affidavit in which Gibbs averred, in part: “Jones never asked me to commit the alleged crime, did not pay or promise[] to pay me, nor was involved with me on this offense....” Jones filed a motion for postconviction relief, based upon the affidavit provided by Gibbs.
The trial court denied the motion without an evidentiary hearing. Specifically, the trial court concluded that the affidavit was not newly discovered evidence because it restated the same theory of defense presented by Jones at his trial. Moreover, the trial court stated that even if it were to find the affidavit facially sufficient, the evidence was not of such a nature that it would probably produce an acquittal on retrial.
*90II. ANALYSIS
Based on the authority of Nordelo, of which the trial court did not have the benefit, we are compelled to reverse and remand for the trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing on Jones’ motion for postconviction relief, as the motion was clearly legally sufficient. See Barrow v. State, 940 So.2d 1235 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); Brantley v. State, 912 So.2d 342 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Burns v. State, 858 So.2d 1229 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003).
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Tajhon Wilson v. State, 188 So. 3d 82 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)…te, 93 So. 3d 178, 185 (Fla.2012) (holding fact that defendant “knew” of existence of co-defendant did not mean co-defendant’s subsequent affidavit — excul [*86] pating defendant — could not be considered newly-discovered, evidence); Jones v. State, 106 So. 3d 88 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013); Harris, 128 So. 3d at 46. Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion. . In light of the requirement that the newly-discovered evidence must have been unknown by defendant or his counsel at the time of tr…
-
Lamb v. State, 212 So. 3d 1108 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017)…‘newly-discovered’ and permits [the defendant] to assert this evidence in support of a motion for relief under rule 3.850.” (citing Archer v. State, 934 So. 2d 1187, 1194 (Fla. 2006); Nordelo v. State, 93 So. 3d 178, 185 (Fla. 2012); Jones v. State, 106 So. 3d 88 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013); Harris v. State, 128 So. 3d 44, 46 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012))). Lastly, Lamb’s complaint in ground seven is that his trial counsel from the public defender’s office did not obtain his “original file” back11 from a different attorney in…
Authorities Cited
- Cedrick Brantley v. State, 912 So. 2d 342 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
- Nordelo v. State, 93 So. 3d 178 (Fla. 2012)
- Jones v. State, 93 So. 3d 178 (Fla. 2012)
- Burns v. State, 858 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)
- Barrow v. State, 940 So. 2d 1235 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)