Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

876 So. 2d 1234

Docket No. 4D03-4702.

Williams v. State

Theodore WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided June 16, 2004.

Rehearing Denied August 4, 2004.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2004-06-16

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently October 2012

4 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“probably produce an acquittal on retrial.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 961 So. 2d 995 - Haywood v. State

Relies on Paul v. A. Levy & J. Zentner Co. · Jones v. State · AmeriSource Corp. v. HJB, Inc.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2004-06-16

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Kathleen M. Williams, Federal Public Defender, and Peter Birch, Assistant Federal Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

¶2No appearance required for appellee.

¶3PER CURIAM.

¶4We affirm an order denying Williams's rule 3.850 motion premised on a claim of *1235 newly discovered evidence. Williams was convicted in 1988 of one count of second-degree murder and one count of aggravated battery in a "drive by" shooting. A co-defendant, Vincent McDaniels, was also convicted and has now executed an affidavit recanting his testimony with respect to who fired the weapon.

¶5We recognize that the trial court failed to conduct an evidentiary hearing before rejecting the recanting affidavit of a co-defendant. See generally Robinson v. State,736 So.2d 93 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). We are, nevertheless, satisfied upon a full review of the record, including jury instructions and testimony of other witnesses, that, taking the affidavit as true, it cannot be said that the new testimony would probably produce an acquittal on re-trial. See Jones v. State,709 So.2d 512, 521 (Fla.), cert. denied,523 U.S. 1040, 118 S.Ct. 1350, 140 L.Ed.2d 499 (1998). Compare Padron v. State,769 So.2d 432 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)(absence of record attachments made it impossible for appellate court to provide meaningful review of finding that recantation of co-defendant would not produce an acquittal).

¶6FARMER, C.J., STONE and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

/876/so2d/1234 · .json · Public domain