Case Name: Datoral SMITH, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2016-09-07
Citations: 208 So. 3d 140
Docket Number: No. 3D15-450
Parties: Datoral SMITH, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before EMAS, LOGUE, and SCALES, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 208
Pages: 140–140

Head Matter:
Datoral SMITH, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 3D15-450.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Sept. 7, 2016.
Rehearing Denied Oct. 17, 2016.
Eugene F. Zenobi, Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel, Third Region, and Kristen Kawass, Assistant Regional Counsel, for appellant.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Brent J. Kelleher, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before EMAS, LOGUE, and SCALES, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Farina v. State, 937 So.2d 612, 622 (Fla.2006) ("[T]he trial court is required to consider all newly discovered evidence which would be admissible at trial and then evaluate the weight of both the newly discovered evidence and the evidence which was introduced at the trial. When reviewing a court's application of the above law to a rule 3.850 motion following an evidentiary hearing, we apply the following standard of review: As long as the trial court's findings are supported by competent substantial evidence, [we] will not substitute [our] judgment . on questions of fact, likewise of the credibility of the witnesses .") (citations and quotations omitted) (emphasis deleted).