Sunday, December 3, 2006

FSC opinion in Gregory Mills

As to Mills’ first claim, the trial court found that the evidence Mills

presented met the test for newly discovered evidence as enunciated by this Court

in Jones v. State, 709 So. 2d 5 19 (Fla. 1998). We agree. The evidence presented

by Anderson was unknown at the time of trial and neither Mills nor his counsel

could have discovered it with due diligence; the evidence would have been


admissible at trial, if only for impeachment; and the newly discovered evidence,

when considered in conjunction with the evidence at Mills’ trial and 3.850

proceedings, would have probably produced a different result at sentencing. The

State has failed to demonstrate an abuse of discretion by the trial judge in his

determination of this issue, See Mills v. State, 26 Fla. L. Weekly S275 (Fla. Apr.

25,2001). Therefore, we affirm that portion of the trial court’s order granting

Mills a new sentencing hearing.

No comments: