Palmer v. State
The Third DCA reversed the summary denial of Palmer's 3.850 motion based on a victim's affidavit recanting his trial identification testimony and alleging police coercion, along with an associated Brady claim regarding fingerprint evidence. The court held that an evidentiary hearing was required because the recantation was neither inherently incredible nor conclusively refuted by the record.
Key facts
- Palmer filed a 3.850 postconviction motion claiming newly discovered evidence based on a victim's affidavit recanting his trial identification testimony and alleging police coercion.
- The trial court summarily denied Palmer's motion; Palmer appealed to the Third District Court of Appeal.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This decision reinforces that summary denial of newly discovered evidence claims premised on witness recantation is rarely appropriate, even where the recantation directly contradicts sworn trial testimony… — 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.