FRAZIER
v.
STATE
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 First District Court of Appeal affirmed the summary denial of an inconsistent verdict claim but reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing on a newly discovered evidence claim in a postconviction relief case.
The appellate court held that the summary denial of the inconsistent verdict claim was proper. However, the court held that the summary denial of the newly discovered evidence claim was improper and required an evidentiary hearing.
[1] A successive motion for postconviction relief based on newly discovered evidence is entitled to an evidentiary hearing when the claim is not facially deficient and meets…
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 intelligence“This is an appeal from the summary denial of Appellant’s successive motion for postconviction relief.”
Establishes the procedural posture of the case.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJames Frazier appealed the summary denial of his successive motion for postconviction relief. The motion raised two claims: an inconsistent verdict cl…
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 Newly Discovered Evidence Claim cases and more on FLexlaw
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________
No. 1D18-5199 _____________________________
JAMES FRAZIER,
Appellant,
v. STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
_____________________________
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. Steven B. Whittington, Judge.
June 18, 2019 PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from the summary denial of Appellant’s successive motion for postconviction relief. We affirm the summary denial of Appellant’s inconsistent verdict claim. However, we reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing on Appellant’s newly discovered evidence claim. See Utile v. State, 235 So. 3d 1045, 1048 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018); Simpson v. State, 100 So. 3d 1258, 1260 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012); Coley v. State, 74 So. 3d 184, 185 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011).
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED for further proceedings.
RAY, BILBREY, and JAY, JJ., concur.
2
_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
_____________________________
James Frazier, pro se, Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Coley v. State, 74 So. 3d 184 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011)
- Simpson v. State, 100 So. 3d 1258 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)
- Utile v. State, 235 So. 3d 1045 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)