Clemmons v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Clemmons v. State

1 So. 3d 1256, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1114, 2009 WL 321652

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 11, 2009

Docket4D08-4486

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 1 So. 3d 1256 (Clemmons v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Clemmons v. State, 1 So. 3d 1256, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1114, 2009 WL 321652 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Derrick Clemmons appeals an order that summarily denies his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal procedure 3.850. We affirm the summary denial of appellant’s second ground of his motion without discussion. Appellant’s first ground alleges that the prosecutor knowingly presented false testimony against him at trial. This is known as a Giglio 1 violation. “To establish a Giglio violation, it must be shown that: (1) the testimony given was false; (2) the prosecutor knew the testimony was false; and (3) the statement was material.” Guzman v. State, 868 So.2d 498, 505 (Fla. 2003) (citing Ventura v. State, 794 So.2d 553, 562 (Fla.2001)). Appellant has failed to sufficiently allege a Giglio violation in his postconviction motion or initial brief; thus, his claim is facially insufficient. However, appellant was not given an opportunity to amend this claim pursuant to Spera v. State, 971 So.2d 754 (Fla.2007). Therefore, we reverse the summary denial of appellant’s first ground and remand for the postconviction court to strike the claim with leave to amend.

Affirmed in Part; Reversed in Part; and Remanded.

WARNER, TAYLOR and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

1

. Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150, 92 S.Ct. 763, 31 L.Ed,2d 104 (1972).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Derrick Clemmons appeals an order that summarily denies his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal procedure 3.850. We affirm the summary denial of appellant’s second ground of his motion without discussion. Appellant’s first ground alleges that the prosecutor knowingly presented false testimony against him at trial. This is known as a Giglio 1 violation. “To establish a Giglio violation, it must be shown that: (1) the testimony given was false; (2) the prosecutor knew the testimony was false; and (3) the statement was material.” Guzman v. State, 868 So.2d 498, 505 (Fla. 2003) (citing Ventura v. State, 794 So.2d 553, 562 (Fla.2001)). Appellant has failed to sufficiently allege a Giglio violation in his postconviction motion or initial brief; thus, his claim is facially insufficient. However, appellant was not given an opportunity to amend this claim pursuant to Spera v. State, 971 So.2d 754 (Fla.2007). Therefore, we reverse the summary denial of appellant’s first ground and remand for the postconviction court to strike the claim with leave to amend.

Affirmed in Part; Reversed in Part; and Remanded.

WARNER, TAYLOR and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

1

. Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150, 92 S.Ct. 763, 31 L.Ed,2d 104 (1972).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 So. 3d 1256, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1114, 2009 WL 321652, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clemmons-v-state-fladistctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack