JOSEPH R. WATTS
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.
A postconviction motion alleging newly discovered evidence cannot be summarily denied unless the record conclusively refutes the claim.
[1] A postconviction motion alleging newly discovered evidence may not be summarily denied unless the record conclusively refutes the claim; if the record does not conclusive…
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 intelligenceJoseph R. Watts filed a postconviction motion alleging newly discovered evidence. The trial court summarily denied the motion.…
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 Evidentiary Hearing Requirement cases and more on FLexlaw
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
JOSEPH R. WATTS,
Appellant,
v. Case No. 5D19-1059
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
________________________________/
Opinion filed November 1, 2019
3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, Denise Kim Beamer, Judge.
Joseph R. Watts, Blountstown, pro se.
No Appearance for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Joseph R. Watts, appeals the summary denial of his postconviction motion alleging newly discovered evidence, arguing that the record does not conclusively refute his claim. We agree. See, e.g., Floyd v. State, 202 So. 3d 137, 138 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016). We therefore remand for the trial court to attach records that conclusively refute Appellant’s claim or to hold an evidentiary hearing. REVERSED AND REMANDED for further proceedings. LAMBERT, EISNAUGLE and GROSSHANS, JJ., concur.