Case Name: Lindel Ray DAVIDSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1994-07-05
Citations: 638 So. 2d 626
Docket Number: No. 94-1120
Parties: Lindel Ray DAVIDSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before HUBBART, BASKIN and COPE, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 638
Pages: 626–626

Head Matter:
Lindel Ray DAVIDSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 94-1120.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
July 5, 1994.
Lindel Ray Davidson, in pro. per.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., for ap-pellee.
Before HUBBART, BASKIN and COPE, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
As the purported recantation testimony is neither sworn nor particularized, and there is no showing how (if at all) the claimed recantation would have affected the trial, the trial court was entirely correct in denying the motion for postconviction relief as facially insufficient.
Affirmed.