JUAN F. PEREZ
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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 postconviction court properly summarily denied Grounds One, Two, Four, and Five, but failed to address Perez's claim of newly discovered evidence regarding an alleged victim conspiracy, requiring remand for attachment of refuting record portions or an evidentiary hearing.
[1] A postconviction court must address a defendant's claim of newly discovered evidence in the form of an affidavit alleging victim conspiracy to lie at trial, and if the co…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJuan F. Perez appealed the summary denial of his second amended motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Perez…
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 Conspiracy To Commit Perjury cases and more on FLexlaw
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FIFTH DISTRICT
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
JUAN F. PEREZ,
Appellant,
v. Case No. 5D20-569
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
________________________________/
Opinion filed October 2, 2020
3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hernando County, Daniel B. Merritt, Jr., Judge.
Juan F. Perez, Graceville, pro se.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Carmen F. Corrente, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Juan F. Perez appeals the summary denial of his second amended motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm as to Grounds One, Two, Four, and Five.
2 We affirm in part and reverse in part as to Ground Three.1 The postconviction court summarily denied part of this ground relating to a victim’s credibility. Perez abandoned this argument on appeal, and we affirm. The postconviction court did not, however, address the remaining part, in which Perez alleges newly discovered evidence in the form of an affidavit claiming that two victims conspired to lie at trial. We remand for attachment of portions of the record refuting that claim or for an evidentiary hearing. See Vaughan v. State, 205 So. 3d 879, 880 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016).
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.
ORFINGER, WALLIS and TRAVER, JJ., concur.