Lennart S. Koo v. State of Florida

I concur in the majority’s decision explaining that the letter from Dr. Saleh, the victim in this case, did constitute newly discovered evidence. I dissent to the extent that the majority denies that the defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing regarding Dr. Saleh’s recantation because — according to the. majority — “the letter did not recant any material trial testimony.” Majority op. at 1102.

The majority’s statement that an eviden-tiary hearing is not required because “the letter did not recant any-, material trial testimony” is overly broad and ignores the reality that the…