← Case library
FL Supreme CourtOctober 8, 2026Affirmed⭐ Notable

Derrick v. State

Case No. SC2024-1318

The Florida Supreme Court affirmed denial of capital postconviction relief on successive 3.851 motions alleging newly discovered evidence that a deceased third party, Keesling, confessed to the murder for which Derrick was sentenced to death. The Court held the hearsay statements failed Florida's statement-against-penal-interest exception because they were largely boastful/braggadocio in a 'lawless' community culture and were insufficiently corroborated, and separately held Chambers v. Mississippi is inapplicable where Florida law already recognizes a statement-against-interest hearsay exception.

Key facts

  • Derrick was sentenced to death and filed successive postconviction motions under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851 based on newly discovered evidence that a deceased third party, Keesling, allegedly confessed to committing the murder for which Derrick was convicted.
  • The newly discovered evidence consisted of hearsay statements in which Keesling purportedly admitted to the murder, made in a community context that valorized violence and 'outlaw' status, with limited independent corroboration.
  • +2 more key facts with a free trial

Why it matters

This opinion gives capital and non-capital postconviction practitioners a detailed, fact-rich template for how Florida courts evaluate third-party confession/newly-discovered-evidence claims under the… — full analysis with a trial

🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library

The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.

Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.

Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.