Gadson v. State
The Fifth DCA affirmed the denial of a time-barred 3.850 motion alleging trial counsel never conveyed a favorable plea offer, holding that rule 3.850(b)(1)'s newly-discovered-evidence exception requires the fact be unknown to BOTH the movant and the movant's attorney. Because trial counsel knew of the offer, the claim did not qualify as newly discovered, regardless of whether the defendant himself knew. The court expressly certified conflict with the Fourth DCA's Clark v. State and Second DCA's Tribbitt v. State, which held that counsel's knowledge is not imputed to the defendant for this purpose.
Key facts
- Defendant Gadson filed a time-barred rule 3.850 motion alleging trial counsel failed to convey a favorable plea offer, which defendant claimed he did not know about.
- Trial counsel had knowledge of the plea offer but did not communicate it to defendant; the trial court denied the motion as time-barred.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This opinion creates an explicit, express district conflict on a recurring postconviction issue—whether an unconveyed plea offer can support an untimely 3.850 motion when only trial counsel (not the defendant) knew of… — 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.