DONTRAVIS SMITH
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 5th DCA | 2018-12-21
No. 18-3095
Harris, J., Evander, J., Eisnaugle, J.
262 So. 3d 239 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2018)

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.


Holding

An evidentiary hearing is required on a Rule 3.850 motion alleging newly-discovered evidence of witness recantation when the affidavit is not inherently incredible or obviously immaterial, even if the evidence would be admissible only for impeachment purposes.


Headnotes

[1] An evidentiary hearing is required on a Rule 3.850 postconviction motion alleging newly-discovered evidence of witness recantation when the recanting witness's affidavit…

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

Key Quotes

“Because the record does not conclusively show that Smith is not entitled to relief, and the nature of the alleged newly-discovered evidence warranted an evidentiary hearing, we reverse.”

Court's statement of the basis for reversal

Facts & Procedural History

Smith was convicted of robbery based on testimony from two victims. One victim, Sharpe, testified with uncertainty that Smith was one of the perpetrat…

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.


Opinion of the Court
Harris

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

DONTRAVIS SMITH,

Appellant,

v. Case No. 5D18-3095

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

________________________________/

Opinion filed December 21, 2018

3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, Jenifer M. Harris, Judge.

Dontravis Smith, Lake City, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Dontravis Smith appeals the summary denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for postconviction relief, in which he alleged a claim of newlydiscovered evidence. In his motion, Smith alleged that Rakim Sharpe, one of the two robbery victims, had recanted his testimony identifying Smith as one of the perpetrators. Sharpe’s affidavit was attached to the motion. Significantly, in his affidavit, Sharpe averred that the other victim, Willie Lofton, had admitted giving false identification testimony at trial. Because the record does not conclusively show that Smith is not

At trial, Sharp testified, with an admitted degree of uncertainty, that Smith was one of the individuals who had robbed him. By contrast, Lofton’s identification testimony was unequivocal. The alleged newly-discovered evidence, as set forth in Sharpe’s affidavit, would arguably undermine his identification testimony at trial, as well as impeach Lofton’s trial testimony. Furthermore, the affidavit was not “inherently incredible” nor “obviously immaterial.” See Davis v. State, 26 So. 3d 519, 526 (Fla. 2009). Accordingly, we conclude that the trial court erred in failing to conduct an evidentiary hearing on Smith’s motion. See Barros v. State, 254 So. 3d 1186, 1187 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018) (holding evidentiary hearing required to evaluate testimony of recanting witness where witness’ affidavit not inherently incredible nor obviously immaterial); Floyd v. State, 202 So. 3d 137, 140 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (holding evidentiary hearing required even though alleged newly-discovered evidence would be admissible only for impeachment purposes; affidavits were consistent with appellant’s theory of defense that witnesses who testified at trial had knowingly given false testimony).

REVERSED and REMANDED for an evidentiary hearing.

EVANDER, EISNAUGLE and HARRIS, JJ., concur.

Footnotes
2 entitled to relief, and the nature of the alleged newly-discovered evidence warranted an evidentiary hearing, we reverse.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw