Terance Valentine v. State of Florida, 339 So.3d 311

Terance Valentine was convicted and sentenced to death for the 1988 torture and murder of Ferdinand Porche after a third trial that resulted in conviction and a death sentence.
Valentine has filed multiple postconviction and federal petitions previously denied; this appeal challenges the summary denial of his second successive rule 3.851 motion.
The motion relied on a recent affidavit from eyewitness Terry Spain stating he saw a white male 40–50 yards away, heard two gunshots, fled, spoke with police multiple times, and was given a hotel room, meals, and $300 by law enforcement during Valentine’s first trial.
Valentine asserted three claims: (1) Spain’s affidavit is newly discovered evidence entitling him to a new guilt-phase trial under Jones; (2) Brady violation for suppression of State’s handling/benefits to Spain; and (3) Giglio violation.
The circuit court summarily denied the motion as procedurally barred and, on the merits, found Spain’s affidavit refuted by the record or legally insufficient and declined to hold an evidentiary hearing.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed, holding summary denial proper because the affidavit did not satisfy Jones, the Brady claim failed for lack of suppression at the challenged trial, and the Giglio claim was legally insufficient and abandoned on appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Spain affidavit is newly discovered evidence under Jones	Spain’s affidavit reveals an eyewitness account and undisclosed State contact/payments that could produce acquittal	Record (police reports, trial transcript) contains the same facts or defense could have discovered them with due diligence; evidence would not likely produce acquittal given overwhelming guilt evidence	Denied — affidavit fails Jones prongs; record refutes claim; no hearing required
Whether State suppressed favorable evidence in violation of Brady	State concealed its handling/benefits to Spain, which was impeaching and material	No suppression as to the conviction being challenged; defense did not show materiality relative to that trial	Denied — failure to show suppression and materiality
Whether there was a Giglio violation	State used/improperly handled Spain in ways that impeach credibility	No allegation of false testimony by a State witness; claim legally insufficient	Denied — legally insufficient and abandoned on appeal
Whether an evidentiary hearing was required on these claims	Factual disputes in Spain’s affidavit necessitate a hearing	Claims are facially insufficient or refuted by the record, so summary denial appropriate	Denied — no hearing; summary denial affirmed

Jones v. State, 709 So. 2d 512 (Fla. 1998) (standard for newly discovered evidence in postconviction motions)
Rogers v. State, 327 So. 3d 784 (Fla. 2021) (when evidentiary hearing is required versus summary denial)
Pardo v. State, 108 So. 3d 558 (Fla. 2012) (facial sufficiency standard for postconviction claims)
Long v. State, 183 So. 3d 342 (Fla. 2016) (application of Jones test)
Tompkins v. State, 994 So. 2d 1072 (Fla. 2008) (discussion of newly discovered evidence standard)
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (prohibits suppression of favorable evidence)
Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972) (impeachment obligation for false testimony/benefits to witnesses)
Sweet v. State, 293 So. 3d 448 (Fla. 2020) (elements required to prove a Brady claim)
Jimenez v. State, 265 So. 3d 462 (Fla. 2018) (Giglio requires identification of false testimony)