History
  • No items yet
midpage
Bain v. State
691 So. 2d 508
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
1997
Check Treatment
HARRIS, Judge.

Deviral Bain is before us on his fourth Rule 3.850 motion. He has been consistently *509unsuccessful thus far and his luck has not changed. We affirm the trial court’s denial of his latest effort.

He claims “newly discovered” evidence that the State withheld impeachment evidence from the defense. He contends that this evidence is contained in an internal investigation file involving Officer Williams, who testified against him at trial. The problem with Bain’s current position is that the evidence is neither newly discovered nor is it admissible evidence. The information contained in the internal investigation file which is relied on by Bain, with due diligence, should have been discovered earlier. More damaging, however, is the fact that the claimed new evidence would have been inadmissible in any event. See Jackson v. State, 545 So.2d 260 (Fla.1989) (evidence of police officer’s department reprimands inadmissible as impeachment evidence as it concerned inadmissible general acts of misconduct; reprimand not a conviction).

AFFIRMED.

DAUKSCH and COBB, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Bain v. State
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: Mar 7, 1997
Citation: 691 So. 2d 508
Docket Number: No. 97-330
Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.