LAWRENCE K. JOHNSON W
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 Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed in part and affirmed in part an order denying post-conviction relief. The court found that newly discovered DNA test results warranted an evidentiary hearing, but a claim of a Giglio violation was waived because the issue was known at trial.
The court held that the newly discovered DNA evidence requires an evidentiary hearing, but the Giglio claim was waived because the issue was known to the defense at trial.
[1] Newly discovered DNA test results constitute sufficient newly discovered evidence to warrant an evidentiary hearing on a Rule 3.850 post-conviction motion when such resul…
[2] A claim of Giglio violation based on allegedly misleading prosecutorial testimony at trial is procedurally barred when raised for the first time in a post-conviction moti…
Previewing 2 of 2 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“As to the first claim, the state concedes, as it did below, that the new DNA test results constitute newly discovered evidence.”
Establishes the state's concession regarding the significance of the new DNA evidence.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLawrence Johnson sought post-conviction relief, alleging newly discovered evidence from DNA testing and a Giglio violation by the state for presenting…
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 Giglio Violation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant Lawrence Johnson appeals an order summarily denying his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. Johnson raised two claims in his motion: (1) a claim of newly discovered evidence based on the results of new DNA testing; and (2) a claim that the state committed a Giglio¹ violation by presenting misleading testimony at trial as to the nature of the original DNA test results.
As to the first claim, the state concedes, as it did below, that the new DNA test results constitute newly discovered evidence. The new test results are akin to a recantation of testimony; thus, an evidentiary hearing is needed to determine whether the evidence entitles Johnson to a new trial. See Davis v. State, 26 So. 3d 519, 526 (Fla. 2009). We therefore reverse the trial court's order as to this claim and remand for an evidentiary hearing.
As to the second claim, to the extent the trial testimony was misleading, the record shows that the issue was known to Johnson and his counsel at trial, and therefore any claim of a Giglio violation should have been timely raised. We therefore affirm the trial court's order as to this claim.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings.
MAY, CIKLIN and ARTAU, JJ., concur.
* * *
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (U.S. 1972)
- Davis v. State, 26 So. 3d 519 (Fla. 2009)