From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Morton v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Sep 5, 1995
659 So. 2d 723 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

Opinion

No. 94-1245.

September 5, 1995.

An Appeal from the circuit court for Escambia County; Joseph Tarbuck, Judge.

K. Jeffrey Reynolds, Pensacola, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Douglas Gurnic, Asst. Atty. Gen., Dept. of Legal Affairs, Tallahassee, for appellee.


This appeal arises from the trial court's denial of appellant's motion for new trial. We reverse and remand for further proceedings because the trial court failed to address the alleged grounds pursuant to rule 3.600(a)(3), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. On remand, the trial court should determine whether appellant established that he discovered new and material evidence, to wit: evidence supporting a defense of mental incapacity, which, if introduced at the trial would probably have changed the verdict, and which the defendant could not with reasonable diligence have discovered and produced at the trial. Rule 3.600(a)(3), Fla. R.Crim.P.

BOOTH, MINER and MICKLE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Morton v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Sep 5, 1995
659 So. 2d 723 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)
Case details for

Morton v. State

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL O'NEAL MORTON, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Sep 5, 1995

Citations

659 So. 2d 723 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)