ÿWPC« /HÔ‰b!:áR ñÐ5dRBaÉTËÔò¤1°X^0ÛKÙUp_ɧ|„ƒ$(è*®ýŽ~ãÃß­.2<‰Æ)C gxu×Vã.&8ì¦V~“Õ¢«×bœž—|Á\Eo£>÷L’\RÊT¯ªCÐ4#g2å0uFн=Í#ZöâŸ_ºH'aÈöŒ¼WÂX“D¸ ¾–µ*J:I£ž…Ñ‚œe£U…h»gn2ÆbÖʆڒ ‹ÏF™26U`!ßÀ~m]ÈÞP¶‚k~»·´ßœ{ö玣î+ŽXO|.!@d—óÖÄ0œÍZû¦Ìrö¡ äwåMìz“ü,áñÑ{Ð]± é·µà:ní J¯ÆÉV—;¹3à¡wÀDÙâ úÒŽU2da4]#5%ÜC.µÌ4̰:ÇwäÝÕöÊPU]vÕ)5nÞ1ð“9.C×î¨Àךä%gk@éÍ™S72#!¼UNÝ %+ 0(1ºY 1u^ ˆw@”4Ôè÷ mùN 0l 0D~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~r z4i®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®®® B 1w4˜HP OfficeJet Series 600 Printer`˜,,,,`˜0(ÈhH  Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ €PINELLAS CrimBabyakPinellasDureanseauresentencing FDLE PCRBACKHUS3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)ʃ+× GUHDIJ{KLMENOEPăû*3|xPÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó hÝ ƒüÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€shawl/blanket€evidence€also€is€significant€in€that€defense€counsel€failed€to€use€OfficerÐ ° ÐÔ_ÔVeskiÔ_Ôððs€testimony€regarding€his€notes€on€the€position€of€the€shawl€and€whether€there€was€evenÏany€blood€on€the€shawl.€€Ô_ÔVeskiÔ_Ô€wrote€that€the€shawl/blanket€was€draped€over€the€òòpassengeróó€seatÐ ˆØ Ðwhen€he€processed€the€rental€car.€€Ô_ÔVeskiÔ_Ô€testified€in€his€deposition€that€the€shawl/blanket€was€inÏthe€backseat€of€the€car.€See€Claim€IV.€€Assuming€one€of€these€two€accounts€is€correct,€Mr.ÏJamesðð€opinion€rings€true€that€it€was€physically€impossible€for€the€presumptive€blood€spatterÏevidence€to€show€whether€the€driverððs€seat€was€occupied€(PC„R.€3774).€€€,Riechmann v. State, 581 So. 2d 133, 136, 141 (Fla. 1CASES _Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòRiechmann€v.€Stateóó,€581€So.€2d€133€(Fla.€1991) d$‰79?EKS[ci1211.1.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)éu!óÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ8€¤pXdìdÈ8Ñò òÔ_Ôà@ššìàIN€THE€CIRCUIT€COURT€OF€THE€ELEVENTH€JUDICIAL€CIRCUIT,ˆÐ ° Ðà@Š Š ìà€IN€AND€FOR€DADE€COUNTY,€FLORIDAˆÌÌÌÌSTATE€OF€FLORIDA,Ìà  àà ` àPlaintiff,ÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àCASE€NO.€87€„€42355Ìv.ÌÌDIETER€RIECHMANN,Ìà  àà ` àDefendant.ó óÐ À  Ð______________________/ÌÌò òòòà@ttìàMOTION€FOR€€DNA€TESTINGóóˆÐ „Ô  Ðó óÓC€ 1 ‰$#CÓÓÓÌà  àCOMES€NOW€THE€DEFENDANT,€ò òDIETER€RIECHMANNó ó,€by€and€throughÐ H˜ Ðundersigned€counsel,€and€respectfully€moves€this€Court€to€grant€his€request€to€conduct€DNAÏtesting€on€the€forensic€evidence€gathered€at€his€original€trial.€€In€support€thereof,€Mr.€RiechmannÏargues€the€following:à ¸ àÐ Ø( Ðà  à1.€€€€€€On€October€18,€2001,€the€Florida€Supreme€Court€issued€Fla.€R.€Crim€P.€3.853,Ïwhich€authorized€procedures€for€obtaining€DNA€(deoxyribonucleic€acid)€testing€under€sectionÏ923.11€Florida€Statutes.€€See,òò€Amendment€to€Florida€Rules€of€Criminal€Procedure€Creating€RuleÐ ` ° Ð3.853€(DNA€Testing)óó,€slip€op€at€page€15€(attached).€€€€The€rule€took€effect€one€day€before€theÐ 8"ˆ  ÐòòHuffóó€hearing€in€the€above€case.€€Mr.€Riechmann€requested€leave€to€file€this€motion€with€the€Court,Ð $`" Ðwhich€was€granted€on€October€19,€2001.€€Ìà  à2.€€€€€This€new€rule€affects€the€issues€raised€in€Mr.€Riechmannððs€post„conviction€motion.€ÏMr.€Riechmann€maintains€his€innocence€of€the€charges€for€which€he€stands€convicted€and€hasÏmaintained€his€innocence€since€1988€when€he€was€indicted€in€this€case.€€€The€new€rule€provides€aÐ p+À&* Ðvehicle€for€criminal€defendants€to€request€DNA€testing€if€the€results€of€the€test€would€ð ðexonerate€Ïthe€movant€of€the€crime€for€which€the€movant€was€sentenced,€or€a€statement€how€the€DNAÏtesting€will€mitigate€the€sentence€received€by€the€movant€for€the€crime.ðð€€See,€Rule€3.853€(b)(3).€€Ìà  à3.€€€€€€€€€During€trial,€the€State€presented€the€testimony€of€state€serologist€Rhodes,€whoÏtestified€about€the€presumptive€blood€spatter€present€on€a€shawl/blanket€inside€the€rental€car.€€TheÏblanket/shawl€was€tested€three€times€by€the€Metro„Dade€Crime€lab.€€The€first€two€times€it€cameÏup€negative€for€blood€evidence.€€The€third€time€it€came€back€positive.€€The€defense€learned€thisÏinformation€on€July€7,€1988€(R.€1090„91).€€Mr.€Rhodes€sprayed€a€large€piece€of€filter€paper€withÏdistilled€water€and€then€sprayed€the€blanket€with€phenothiazine€reagent€and€sodium€perborateÏreagent.€€Thereafter,€Rhodes€looked€for€a€ð ðpinkðð€color€to€appear€on€the€filter€paper.€(R.€3769„¼3770).€€Rhodes€testified€that€these€pink€specks€could€be€blood€or€plant€material€that€is€found€inÏdifferent€places€in€nature€(R.€3771).€€The€presumptive€blood€specks€were€so€ð ðminuteðð€that€RhodesÏplaced€a€plastic€overlay€on€the€blanket€to€assist€the€jury€in€seeing€the€location€of€these€tiny€pinkÏspecks.€€To€emphasize€these€specks€so€the€jury€could€see€them,€Mr.€Rhodes€marked€them€with€bigÏcircles€(R.€3787).€€The€defense€objected€to€the€introduction€of€the€overlay€with€the€large€circlesÏdrawn€on€it.€(R.€3787).€€The€objection€was€overruled.€€€€Ìà  à4.€€€€€Despite€the€fact€that€the€back€of€Mr.€Riechmannððs€jeans€did€not€have€blood€on€them,Ïthe€State€suggested€at€trial€that€the€spots€on€the€blanket€that€Mr.€Riechmann€was€supposedlyÏsitting€on€showed€that€he€could€not€have€been€in€the€driverððs€seat€at€the€time€of€the€shooting€€(R.Ï3794„3802;€3863).€€€Mr.€Riechmann€testified€that€he€had€used€the€blanket€in€Germany€to€wrap€hisÏdogs€after€they€had€surgery,€and€for€other€purposes.€€€ñLñMr.€Rhodes€testifñLññMññLñeñLññMññNñied€that€other€plantÏmaterial€common€to€nature€could€have€caused€the€ñNññOññNñpinkñNññOññPñpink€color€to€appear.€€ñPñThe€testing€was€notÐ h+¸&* Ðsophisticated€enough€at€the€time€to€determine€what€the€pink€spots€were.€€€Ìà  à5.€€€€€On€direct€appeal,€the€Florida€Supreme€Court€underscored€the€significance€that€thisÏblood€evidence€played€in€convicting€Mr.€Riechmann.€Citing€testimony€from€Rhodes€that€blood€onÏthe€driverððs€door€ð ðcould€not€have€gotten€there€if€the€driverððs€seat€was€occupied,ðð€the€FloridaÏSupreme€Court€stated,€ð ðWe€are€satisfied...[e]vidence€of€blood€spatter€and€stains€on€the€car,Ïblanket€and€clothes€was€consistent€with€the€stateððs€theory€of€what€happened€that€night.ððÏòòÔ €+ ÔRiechmann€v.€Stateóó,€581€So.€2d€133,€136,€141€(Fla.€1991).Ð À  Ðà  à€6.€€€€€€At€the€1996€evidentiary€hearing,€defense€expert€Stuart€James€concluded€thatÏRhodesðð€testing€of€the€blanket€was€so€unscientific€that€to€use€it€as€proof€that€the€driverððs€seat€wasÏunoccupied€was€ð ðvery€misleading.ðð€(PC„R.€3702„3703).׃(×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€Ð H˜ Ðà  à7.€€€€€€The€DNA€technology€for€testing€the€blanket€was€not€developed€at€the€time€of€Mr.ÏRiechmannððs€trial€in€1988.€€€Since€that€time,€mitochondrial€DNA€testing€has€been€developed€thatÏallows€physical€evidence€to€be€tested€even€when€the€sample€is€very€small.€€DNA€testing€was€notÏconducted€on€the€blanket,€which€could€have€established€conclusively€whether€the€specks€on€theÏblanket€were€blood,€and€if€it€was€blood,€whether€it€was€animal€or€human.€€This€blanket/shawl€isÏlocated€in€the€Dade€County€Circuit€Clerkððs€Office€as€an€exhibit€to€Mr.€Riechmannððs€trial.€€Ìà  à8.€€€€€€Should€defense€testing€prove€that€the€specks€are€not€Ms.€Kischnickððs€blood,€thisÏfinding€would€exonerate€and€mitigate€Mr.€Riechmannððs€conviction.€€€Mr.€Riechmann€hasÐ $X" Ðrepeatedly€and€vehemently€maintained€his€innocence.€€The€only€physical€evidence€that€could€beÏtested€in€this€case€is€the€blanket.€€The€blanket€is€readily€available€and€could€be€divided€so€that€aÏdefense€expert€of€Mr.€Riechmannððs€choosing€could€conduct€the€mitochondrial€DNA€testing.€€AtÏthe€time€the€rule€goes€into€effect,€Mr.€Riechmann€would€request€that€he€be€granted€leave€to€haveÏmitochondrial€DNA€testing€of€the€blanket€by€a€defense€expert.€€Ìà  à9.€€€€€Even€though€Rule€3.853€(c)(7)€designates€that€DNA€testing€is€to€be€conducted€by€theÏð ðFlorida€Department€of€Law€Enforcement€(FDLE),ðð€the€rule€provides€that€the€trial€court,€on€aÏshowing€of€good€cause,€may€order€testing€done€by€an€independent€laboratory€or€agency€certifiedÏby€American€Society€of€Crime€Laboratory€Directors€or€the€National€Forensic€Science€TrainingÏCenter€when€requested€by€movant€who€can€bear€the€costs€of€such€testing.ðð€Rule€3.853€(c)(7).€ÏMr.€Riechmann€can€bear€the€cost€of€testing.Ìà  à10.€€€€€Counsel€has€been€informed€that€FDLE€does€not€have€the€capability€to€doÏmitochondrial€DNA€testing.€€€Because€the€blanket€is€large,€and€because€Mr.€Riechmann€has€noÏconfidence€that€FDLE€would€be€any€more€accurate€in€its€testing€than€Mr.€Rhodes,€Mr.€RiechmannÏwould€request€that€any€sample€taken€from€the€blanket€be€split€so€that€he€may€have€his€own€testingÏconducted€at€a€forensic€laboratory€of€his€choice€or€that€a€defense€expert€of€his€choosing€be€presentÏwhen€any€testing€is€done€by€the€State.€€€Ìà  à11.€€€€€€Mr.€Riechmann€has€raised€the€issue€of€unreliable€forensic€testing€in€his€amendedÏRule€3.850€filed€on€September€13,€2001.€€This€Court€should€find€that€the€files€and€records€do€notÏconclusively€show€that€Mr.€Riechmann€was€not€entitled€to€relief,€therefore€an€evidentiary€hearingÏshould€be€granted€on€this€issue.€€Ìà  à12.€€€€€A€definitive€result€from€DNA€testing€of€the€remaining€physical€evidence€in€this€caseÐ h+¸&* Ðcould€exonerate€Mr.€Riechmann.€€If€the€spots€on€the€blanket/shawl€are€not€human€blood€or€notÏconsistent€with€Ms.€Kischnickððs€blood,€it€stands€to€reason€that€Mr.€Riechmann€was€occupying€theÏdriverððs€seat€at€the€time€Ms.€Kischnick€was€shot.€€Therefore,€he€is€not€the€perpetrator.€€The€StateÏargued€at€trial€that€Mr.€Riechmann€was€guilty€and€should€be€sentenced€to€death€in€part€because€ofÏthe€forensic€evidence.€€Ìà  à13.€€€Sufficient€samples€remain€to€conduct€DNA€testing.€€The€blanket/shawl€is€still€intact€inÏthe€Dade€County€Circuit€Clerkððs€Office€where€it€has€remained€since€it€was€introduced€intoÏevidence€in€1988.€€Ìò òó óà  à14.€€€€€Should€this€Court€decide€that€testing€is€warranted,€Mr.€Riechmann€would€beÐ pÀ Ðentitled€to€request€that€either€the€sample€be€split€so€that€he€could€have€testing€done€at€anÏindependent€laboratory€not€connected€with€the€prosecution,€or€that€his€expert€be€present€for€anyÏtesting€done€by€FDLE.€€Mr.€Riechmannððs€concern€is€that€the€remaining€sample€would€beÏdestroyed€by€FDLE€agents.€€Further,€the€age€and€small€amount€of€the€samples€indicates€thatÏmitochondrial€DNA€testing€would€be€preferable€to€nuclear€testing€such€as€STR€or€PCR€DNAÏtesting.€€Mr.€Riechmann€suggests€that€he€has€shown€good€cause€for€an€independent€laboratory€toÏbe€used€for€mitochondrial€DNA€testing.€€In€addition,€counsel€was€informed€that€FDLE€does€notÏhave€the€present€ability€to€conduct€mitochondrial€DNA€testing.€€€See,€òò€Amendment€to€FloridaÐ 0"€  ÐRules€of€Criminal€Procedure€Creating€Rule€3.853€(DNA€Testing)óó,€slip€op€at€page€17.€€€€Ð $X" Ðà  àò òWHEREFORE,€ó ófor€the€foregoing€reasons,€Mr.€Riechmann€requests€that€he€be€allowed€toÐ à%0!$ Ðconduct€DNA€testing€on€the€forensic€evidence€gathered€for€his€initial€trial€in€1988.€€Ìò òà@ìì*ìàñGñˆÌñGñÐ p+À&* Ðà@nnìàCertificate€of€ServiceˆÌà  àI€HEREBY€CERTIFYó ó€that€a€true€and€correct€copy€of€the€foregoing€Defendantððs€MotionÐ ˆØ Ðfor€DNA€Testing€has€been€furnished€by€hand€delivery€to€Ms.€Sandra€Jaggard,€Assistant€AttorneyÏGeneral,€444€Brickell€Ave.,€Ste.950,€€Miami,€€FL€33131„2407;€Mr.€Reid€Rubin,€Assistant€StateÏAttorney,€1350€N.W.€12òòthóó€Street,€Miami,€FL€33136„2111€onñJñ€ñJññHñOctober€3ñHññIñ€NñIññKñovember€ñKñ1,€2001.Ð  h ÐÌÓÓà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à____________________Ìà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àò òTERRI€€L.€BACKHUSÐ  ð  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àFla.€Bar€No.€0946427Ìà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àPost€Office€Box€3294Ìà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à303€South€Westland€Ave.Ìà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àTampa,€FL€33601„3294Ìà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à(813)€259„4424Ìó óÌcc:€ÌÌMr.€Reid€RubenÌOffice€of€the€State€AttorneyÌòòóó1350€N.W.€12òòthóó€StreetÐ Ä ÐMiami,€FL€33136„2111ÌÌHonorable€Jerald€BagleyÌCircuit€Court€JudgeÌòòóó1351€N.W.€12òòthóó€StreetÐ ` ° ÐMiami,€FL€33135ÌÌMs.€Sandra€JaggardÌAsst.€Attorney€GeneralÌ444€Brickell€Ave.,€Ste.950ÌMiami,€€FL€33131„2407