Green v. State
The Fifth DCA reversed summary denial of a 3.850 newly-discovered-evidence claim based on a decades-old alibi affidavit, holding the trial court erred both in finding the affidavit 'inherently incredible' merely due to the passage of time and in misreading the trial record to conclude the defendant himself had admitted presence at the crime scene (it was defense counsel's strategic concession, not the defendant's admission). The court remanded for further proceedings. A concurring opinion separately flagged that the affidavit was not properly sworn by the affiant (only notarized) and that the defendant's own 3.850 certification lacked the required perjury oath, rendering the motion facially insufficient and requiring an opportunity to amend under Rule 3.850(f)(2)/(n)(2) before any evidentiary hearing.
Key facts
- Green was convicted and filed a Rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief based on a newly discovered alibi affidavit from decades earlier that was not presented at trial.
- The trial court summarily denied the motion, finding the affidavit 'inherently incredible' due to the passage of over thirty years and concluding the defendant had admitted presence at the crime scene.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This decision gives practitioners a concrete counterexample to overly broad application of the 'inherently incredible' doctrine in newly discovered evidence claims, reinforcing that courts cannot dismiss stale alibi… — 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.