Zeth Trawick v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Zeth Trawick v. State

225 So. 3d 400, 2017 WL 3642095, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 12104

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 25, 2017

DocketCase 5D16-2367

StatusPublished

This text of 225 So. 3d 400 (Zeth Trawick 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

Zeth Trawick v. State, 225 So. 3d 400, 2017 WL 3642095, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 12104 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Zeth Trawick (“Appellant”) appeals the denial of two grounds of his twelve-ground motion for postconviction relief, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm the denial of the first challenged ground without discussion. However, we reverse the summary denial of the second ground and remand for an evidentiary hearing.

Throughout his trial for second-degree murder, Appellant maintained that. he killed the victim in self-defense. Nonetheless, the jury found Appellant guilty, and the trial court sentenced him to life in prison. 1 Appellant subsequently filed a pro se motion for postconviction relief, alleging that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to obtain exculpatory photographs and proceeding to trial without them. Specifically, he argued photographs of his hands and arms, taken by the DeLand Police Department, would have depicted a fresh cut, purportedly made by the victim’s knife during the altercation that resulted in the victim’s death. Appellant argued these photographs would have demonstrated that he had defensive wounds from attempting to deflect an attack. The trial court summarily denied this claim.

The record on appeal contains evidence that trial counsel otherwise explored Appellant’s self-defense theory and cross-examined the medical examiner concerning the injuries to both the victim and Appellant, However, this evidence does not conclusively refute Appellant’s claim that the introduction of the photographs would have bolstered his self-defense argument, especially in response to the State’s introduction of photographs of the victim’s defensive injuries and testimony from two witnesses denying the existence of Appellant’s injury. Thus, we reverse the trial court’s summary denial of this ground and remand for an evidentiary hearing on the matter. See Saunders v. State, 186 So.3d 56, 57 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) (“Because claim 2 is not conclusively refuted by the attached record, we remand for an evidentia-ry hearing.”),

AFFIRMED in Part; REVERSED in Part; REMANDED with Instructions.

ORFINGER, WALLIS and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.

1

. We per curiam affirmed Appellant’s direct appeal of the judgment and sentence. Trawick v. State, 46 So.3d 65 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010).

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

PER CURIAM.

Zeth Trawick (“Appellant”) appeals the denial of two grounds of his twelve-ground motion for postconviction relief, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm the denial of the first challenged ground without discussion. However, we reverse the summary denial of the second ground and remand for an evidentiary hearing.

Throughout his trial for second-degree murder, Appellant maintained that. he killed the victim in self-defense. Nonetheless, the jury found Appellant guilty, and the trial court sentenced him to life in prison. 1 Appellant subsequently filed a pro se motion for postconviction relief, alleging that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to obtain exculpatory photographs and proceeding to trial without them. Specifically, he argued photographs of his hands and arms, taken by the DeLand Police Department, would have depicted a fresh cut, purportedly made by the victim’s knife during the altercation that resulted in the victim’s death. Appellant argued these photographs would have demonstrated that he had defensive wounds from attempting to deflect an attack. The trial court summarily denied this claim.

The record on appeal contains evidence that trial counsel otherwise explored Appellant’s self-defense theory and cross-examined the medical examiner concerning the injuries to both the victim and Appellant, However, this evidence does not conclusively refute Appellant’s claim that the introduction of the photographs would have bolstered his self-defense argument, especially in response to the State’s introduction of photographs of the victim’s defensive injuries and testimony from two witnesses denying the existence of Appellant’s injury. Thus, we reverse the trial court’s summary denial of this ground and remand for an evidentiary hearing on the matter. See Saunders v. State, 186 So.3d 56, 57 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) (“Because claim 2 is not conclusively refuted by the attached record, we remand for an evidentia-ry hearing.”),

AFFIRMED in Part; REVERSED in Part; REMANDED with Instructions.

ORFINGER, WALLIS and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.

1

. We per curiam affirmed Appellant’s direct appeal of the judgment and sentence. Trawick v. State, 46 So.3d 65 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

225 So. 3d 400, 2017 WL 3642095, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 12104, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zeth-trawick-v-state-fladistctapp-2017.