Sauveur v. State

Full title: WILKING SAUVEUR, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.

Court: Florida Court of Appeals, Fourth District

Date published: Jul 17, 2024

No. 4D2023-2434 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Jul. 17, 2024)

Opinion

4D2023-2434

07-17-2024

WILKING SAUVEUR, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.

Wilking Sauveur, Cross City, pro se. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Pablo Tapia, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; Lawrence M. Mirman, Judge; L.T. Case No. 562012CF001698C.

Wilking Sauveur, Cross City, pro se.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Pablo Tapia, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the trial court's order summarily denying appellant's motion for postconviction relief and remand for further proceedings. Appellant stated a facially sufficient claim of newly discovered evidence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850(b)(1). The trial court erred in denying the claim without an evidentiary hearing. Simpson v. State, 100 So.3d 1258 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012); Borders v. State, 309 So.3d 314 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020).

Reversed.

GROSS, MAY and FORST, JJ., concur.