Legal Opinion

Espinoza v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided July 8, 2009No. 3D08-2720PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtCope, J.

This is a petition for writ of mandamus which seeks to compel additional findings by the trial court in proceedings relating to DNA testing. We deny the petition.

Pedro Pablo Espinoza filed a motion for postconviction DNA testing under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.853. In the motion he alleged that he had been convicted of sexual battery and trespassing. He requested DNA testing of evidence in the case.

The State and counsel for defendant-petitioner Espinoza entered into an agreed order for DNA testing. Pursuant to rule 3.853(c)(8), the results were provided to the parties. According to…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Rivera v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2008
  2. Hildwin v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2006
  3. Swafford v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2006
  4. Huffman v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2005
  5. Haywood v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2007

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Montez v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2017

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API