"Felos claims the testimony would be irrelevant and that Judge Baird should only decide whether Terri's Law is constitutional and not reexamine the facts of the case." The 'finding of facts', already butchered by Greer, is what Felos wants to protect from review. Felos is depending on 'nepotism' in Flordia judiciary, to prevent this horrific miscarriage of the justice system from getting out of Felos's bloody control. Baurd has a way to allow it ... if the findings previously by Greer were not faulty (and to know, they must be re-evaluated), then the new 'Terri's Law' is unnecessary since the foundation for what followed in appeals 'is not faulty'.
Baird can also do the judicial oligarchy dance and declare the review of Greer's findings to be irrelevant, making the gross assumption that 'a fellow judge would not err at so fundamental a level', disregarding the real possibility--proven in numerous criminal cases--that the findings may be horribly incorrect or based on collusion between the court and one or more parties involved (can we say 'Felos'?).