Kellum v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kellum v. State

242 So. 3d 539

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 18, 2018·No. No. 1D16–2188·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

*540Lidale R. Kellum appeals the trial court's denial of his motion seeking postconviction relief based on newly discovered evidence. Because the evidence on which Kellum relied was discoverable at the time of his violation of probation hearing, the trial court properly denied the motion. See Rutherford v. State , 926 So.2d 1100, 1107 (Fla. 2006) (holding that newly discovered evidence must be based on facts that were unknown to the trial court, appellant, and his counsel at the time of trial and that neither the appellant nor his counsel could have discovered the facts through the exercise of due diligence).

AFFIRMED.

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

Per Curiam.

*540Lidale R. Kellum appeals the trial court's denial of his motion seeking postconviction relief based on newly discovered evidence. Because the evidence on which Kellum relied was discoverable at the time of his violation of probation hearing, the trial court properly denied the motion. See Rutherford v. State , 926 So.2d 1100, 1107 (Fla. 2006) (holding that newly discovered evidence must be based on facts that were unknown to the trial court, appellant, and his counsel at the time of trial and that neither the appellant nor his counsel could have discovered the facts through the exercise of due diligence).

AFFIRMED.

Kellum v. State, 242 So. 3d 539 (Fla. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

242 So. 3d 539 (Kellum v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related