NORMAN BABERS
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.
A trial court must either attach to its order portions of the record conclusively refuting a Brady claim or conduct an evidentiary hearing rather than summarily denying it.
[1] A trial court may not summarily deny a Brady v. …
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 intelligenceNorman Babers filed a motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, alleging a Brady violation and claiming two pie…
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 Brady Violation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Norman Babers appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Babers alleges a violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87 (1963), as well as two pieces of newly discovered evidence. We affirm regarding the claims of newly discovered evidence without further discussion. As to Babers’s Brady argument, we remand for the trial court to attach to its order portions of the record conclusively refuting the claim or for an evidentiary hearing.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED. SAWAYA, PALMER and WALLIS, JJ., concur.