Reed v. State

Royce M. REED, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided April 21, 2004.

Rehearing Denied June 4, 2004.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2004-04-21

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently September 2014

6 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“`[A] defendant who enters a plea of guilty or nolo contendere may not seek postconviction DNA testing based on the language of [section 925.11(1)(a), Florida Statutes].'”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 907 So. 2d 609 - Fuentes v. State

Relies on Stewart v. State · 854 So. 2d 684 - Smith v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2004-04-21

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Royce M. Reed, in proper person.

¶2Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, for appellee.

¶3Before GERSTEN, GODERICH, and FLETCHER, JJ.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5Royce Reed appeals the denial of his motion for post-conviction DNA testing pursuant to section 925.11(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2002), and Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.853. We affirm the trial court's denial because "[a] defendant who enters a plea of guilty or nolo contendere may not seek postconviction DNA testing based on the language of the statute." Smith v. State,854 So.2d 684, 685 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)(citing Stewart v. State,840 So.2d 438 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)).

¶6Affirmed.