Davidson v. State
638 So. 2d 626, 1994 WL 316290
Opinion
Lindel Ray DAVIDSON, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Lindel Ray Davidson, in pro. per.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before HUBBART, BASKIN and COPE, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
As the purported recantation testimony is neither sworn nor particularized, and there is no showing how (if at all) the claimed recantation would have affected the trial, the trial court was entirely correct in denying the motion for postconviction relief as facially insufficient.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Davidson v. State, 638 So. 2d 626, 1994 WL 316290 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).
638 So. 2d 626 (Davidson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Rolle v. State
56 So. 3d 111 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2011)
Moss v. State
943 So. 2d 946 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2006)
Moran v. State
651 So. 2d 834 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)