Q: How to address fabricated evidence in my son's 2015 case in FL?

A: The usual method is a motion for post conviction relief under Rule 3.850. Normally, there is a time limit of 2 years from the date your son's case. That time limit does not apply when there is newly discovered evidence which could not have been discovered earlier through the exercise of due diligence. The first problem is to resolve why your son didn't recognize that the recordings used against him were falsified. Assuming that there is a good explanation for your son not knowing that the recordings were falsified at the time of trial or plea, there needs to be an explanation why the falsified evidence wasn't discovered for many years. Assuming that there is a good explanation for that extended delay, the claim must be made within 2 years of either the actual discovery or the date that the falsification should have been discovered through the exercise of due diligence. Your inquiry doesn't specify whether there was a plea or a trial. The arguments are different for attacking a plea and a trial. Essentially, your son would have to show that no reasonable person would have plead if informed about the falsified evidence. If there was a trial, the falsified evidence would have to undermine confidence in the verdict. Your inquiry suggests that somebody in the law enforcement ecosystem falsified that evidence. In such a case, it might be a denial of due process for the State to knowingly use falsified evidence. You need to unpack all of this with an experienced post conviction lawyer to see where it goes. All of this is complicated at several levels. My comments are of a general nature which are intended to guide your search for justice, but cannot be specific to your son's situation.