CARLOS GARCIA, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 2006-02-15
No. 4D05-3755
STEVENSON, C.J., POLEN and KLEIN, JJ., concur.
920 So. 2d 204 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2006) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We reverse an order summarily denying appellant’s 3.850 motion because the affidavit of the victim could constitute newly discovered evidence which would not be barred by untimeliness.

STEVENSON, C.J., POLEN and KLEIN, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Ganey v. State, 977 So. 2d 698 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)
    …incorrect. Contrary to the findings of the postconviction court, there are numerous examples of appellate cases applying rule 3.850 to probation revocation hearings. See e.g. Flowers v. State, 947 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007); Hollander v. State, 920 So. 2d 204, (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Gilbert v. State, 913 So. 2d 84, 85 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Phelps v. State, 911 So. 2d 186 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); Mikell v. State, 903 So. 2d 1054, 1054 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Medrano v. State, 892 So. 2d 508 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004). Neve…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw