Bryan Sydney Mensah, Appellant, v. State of Florida, Appellee. (2026)

Bryan Mensah appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm as to ground 1, but reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing as to ground 2. Mensah's ground 2 claims a Giglio ¹ violation, alleging the State allowed a key witness against Mensah to testify falsely. Specifically, Mensah alleged his trial counsel told him the State promised the witness a lenient plea deal in return for his testimony against Mensah, and further alleged the State knowingly elicited false testimony from the witness that he was not promised anything by the State in return for his testimony. While it's true Mensah's motion did not include or point to any evidence of the truth of these allegations, the portions of the record the postconviction court attached to its order denying the motion do not conclusively refute them. Thus, the record does not “show[ ] conclusively that the appellant is entitled to no relief,” and we “must ․ reverse[ ] and ․ remand[ ] for an evidentiary hearing or other appropriate relief.” Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2)(D).

Accordingly, as to the alleged Giglio violation in ground 2, we reverse the order denying Mensah's rule 3.850 motion and remand for the trial court to either enter a new order of denial attaching record materials conclusively refuting Mensah's allegations, conduct an evidentiary hearing on the motion, or conduct other proceedings consistent with this opinion.²

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED with instructions.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972).

2.   Because it is not before us, and given our limited record, we make no determination as to whether ground 2 was sufficiently pled. On remand, prior to conducting any evidentiary hearing, the postconviction court is free to reconsider the legal sufficiency of ground 2 in Mensah's amended motion.

GANNAM, J.

TRAVER, C.J., and BROWNLEE, J., concur.