WPC   4@a>L"?b|_x?xXPAߵKU%Xbk;\c'xh"]tz P  #  3          7. ` Asfortheassertionthat itwouldbeunderstandableunderthese  circumstancesnottoinvite_Mordenti_scounseltoaninterviewinapossiblehomicideinvestigation,thisCourtdidnotindicatethat_Mordenti_scounselhadto @ be _invite[d_]toaninterviewinapossiblehomicideinvestigation,butthattheinformationobtainedbe providedtobothsides(SlipOp.at19).Moreover,theinterviewwasnotlimitedtodeterminingthecauseofMr._Royston_sdeath.John_Trevena_Ԁtestified:` ThefirstfewquestionscenteredaroundwhetherornotMr.Roystonexpressedanysuicidaltendencies,andIindicatedhedidnot.ThentheconversationquicklymovedintotheinformationthatMr.Roystonhadprovidedmeduringthecourseoftherepresentationandspecificallyregardingthecontentsofthemotiontosever,whichuptothatpointhadbeenpreviouslysealed.` $$(PCT.328).Thus,accordingtoMr._Trevena_,theinterview,thoughinitiallyaboutMr.Roystonssuicide,quicklyveeredintodiscovery.R  #  4      ׀_Trevena_stestimonyabout  thescopeoftheinterviewiscorroboratedbythehandwrittennotesoftheinterviewpreparedbyNickCox.Thefirstlineinthenoteswas wasnotsuicidal.(DEx. P #23).Thenthenotescontinuedwith Blackmailwaswhat_Roysytyton_ԀalwayssaidGailwasmuchmoreseriouslyinvolvedthanshehassaid.Roystonwasupsetb/cGailwasthemainorchestratoroftheentirescheme(DEx.#23).Accordingtothenotes,Mr._Trevena_Ԁthenindicatedthathewasfirst contactwhen_HCSO_ # requestedpolygraphon6/28/89!John[_Trevena_]willtellallbasedonorder(DEx.#23).  8. ` #nn#nnMoreover,KarenCoxtestifiedthather initialthoughtastoMr. @ Roystonpossiblybeingmurderedwasinerror:` Now,Iwasinformedlaterthatitwaseverybodywassatisfiedthatitwasanapparentsuicide,soIdontwanttoapply[sic]Mr.Mordentihadanythingtodowiththat.` ,',(PCT.60). T  #  5      ׀Clearly,onceitwasdeterminedthatMr.Roystonwasthevictimof p   anapparentsuicide,therewasnoreasonfortheinformationobtainedexpartenottobeshared.OnlybyignoringMs.CoxstestimonyonthispointcantheStatedefenditsconductandchallengethisCourtsobservationthat dueprocessandfairnessdictatethatthisinformationjudiciallyorderedtoberevealedtotheStateshouldhavebeenprovidedtobothsides(SlipOp.at19).  9.InitsMotionforRehearing,theStatecontinuesitscampaignofobfuscationandmisrepresentationwhenitturnsitsattentionto [_t]he_Ԁcalendar P  book.(Motionat2).AlthoughtheMotionnotesinpassingthatthefailuretodisclose#nno+#nnԀ thecalendarbookwasbasisforthenewtrial,theStateinaclumsyifnot   ridiculoussleightofhandthenargues:` TheCourthasoverlookedorfailedtoconsiderthefactthattrial defensecounselhadthedocumentaryevidence 󄀄fromtheearlier  p defenseinvestigationbyattorneyCohenandinvestigatorMillweewhereinGailMordentireferredtoGartleyonApril12asanalbatross(DefenseExhibit58,Supp.RecordVolume8,p.1419).WhetherthelunchoccurredinFebruaryorMarchorlaterinApril,thedefensecouldstillhaveimpeachedbyaskingGail_Mordenti_Ԁwhyshewouldapproachalbatross_Gartley_Ԁasapotentialsourceforfindingahitman.   ` 11Motionat3(emphasisadded). Thedocumentaryevidencethatwasnot  disclosedwasthedatebook .( theStateswithholdingofGailsdatebook)(Slip  Op.at8).DW  #  6      ׀ D   10. ` ThedatebookrevealedthatGail_Mordenti_Ԁ_Milligan_strialtestimony d wasfalseastothedateoftheluncheonatwhichsheandMr.Roystonbeganplanningthemurderofhiswife.AY  #  7      ׀Thedatebookrevealedthattheluncheon T happenedonApril11th,notin lateFebruaryorthebeginningofMarch(R.609  10).InFebruaryof1989,Gail_Mordenti_Ԁ_Milligan_ԀwasinbusinesswithJack_Gartley_Ԁ(PCT.867).Aftersheleftthatbusiness,itwaslearnedthatnearly$200,000wasmissing.SometimepriortoApril11th,Gaillearnedthatshewasto  ` bequestionedonApril12thregardingthemissingmoney(PCT.1067).The 0  impeachmentvalueofherApril12thstatementstrashingJack_Gartley_Ԁandheroffer P  totestifyagainsthim(DEx.58)issignificantlyincreasedbytheinformationthattheluncheonwithMr.Roystonhappenedthedaybefore,notmonthsbefore.Clearly,GailsrelationshipwithJack_Gartley_Ԁdeclinedafterabankallegedthatoneofthemstolenearly$200,000.AsthedateoftheluncheonshiftsfromFebruarytoApril11th,thesignificanceoftheApril12thinterviewincreasesitsimpeachment @ value.OnApril12th,Gailofferedtocooperatewiththebankinordertoplacethe ` blameon#nn0#nn_Gartley_Ԁ( IfeelthatIprobablyhaveinformationconcerningthe 0 dispositionofspecificcarsifthebankwouldbeinterestedandrequestedspecifics) P  (DEx.58).Thisleadstotheobviousquestion: Wouldsomeoneplanningafirstdegreemurderaskthemanwhomshehasjustofferedtonailasathiefifhewouldcommitamurderforher?Acompellingargumentcanbemadethatanyonewithafunctioningbrainwouldknownottogivesomeonewhomtheyareaccusingofacrimeandofferingtotestifyagainstevidencethattheyaretryingtoarrangeamurder!Gailsstoryisafabrication.ButthisargumentisdependentuponknowingthattheluncheonwasApril11th.TheStatesassertioninitsMotionfor p  Rehearing( WhetherthelunchoccurredinFebruaryorMarchorlaterinApril,thedefensecouldstillhaveimpeachedbyaskingGail_Mordenti_Ԁwhyshewouldapproachalbatross_Gartley_Ԁasapotentialsourceforfindingahitman_?[  #  8      _#nn<#nn)issimply   false.WithoutthatbitoftruthfulinformationthatthelunchoccurredonApril11thknowledgeoftheApril12thstatementdoesnotprovideabasisforthesame ` powerfulargument,particularlywherefalsetestimonywaspresentedthattheluncheonoccurredin lateFebruaryorthebeginningofMarch.B]  #  9         #nnAB#nn  10.IntheMotionforRehearing,theStatesnextefforttoobfuscateand @ misrepresentistoimplythatthesignificanceofDEx.#14concernedonlyaninvitationtogotoTennessee:`  AstothenotationinDefenseExhibit14regardingRoystonsinvitationtoGailtogotoTennesseeandhispossibleromanticinterestinher,irrespectiveofwhetherprosecutorsCoxsnotewasprovidedtothedefense,thefactremainsthattrialcounselwereawareofthatfromthepretrialdepositionsthathadbeentakenofGail_Mordenti_.` EE#nnD#nn(Motionat3)._G@ `@   #  10      _ԀAccordingly,theStateargues, sincethedefenseteamknewof  RoystonsinvitationtoGailtogotoTennessee,thefailuretosupplytheExhibit14noteaboutthis,addsnothingofmateriality.(Motionat4).However,DEx.#14includedhandwrittennotesofstatementsgivenbyGail_Mordenti_Ԁ_Milligan_ԀandstatementsgivenbyMichael_Milligan_.  11.AstoGail,thesenotesmemorializedherstatementsasfollows: HeinvitedhertoTenn. P  Hesaidthathedid[not]wanttodateuntildivorcewasover&had `  timetogetheadtogether p  3or4monthshadaconfidingtyperelationship    (DEx.14,at2,lines1720).` Larryhadaboat[which]shewastryingtosellitforhim$20,000  Larryhadrebuiltengines   ` (DEx.14,page2lines3132). h #nn{G#nn @ ` Michaelmadenoeffortstosellboat&car ` DoesntthinkthateverlookedforbuyersLarrysboatwasareplicaoftheboatused ongoldenpondnotahighpoweredspeedboat @ ` (DEx.15,at1,line3134).AstoMichael_Milligan_,thesenotesmemorializedhisstatementsinthe#nnL#nnfollowingfashion: # ` ` 6/89mordenticalledhim&hadcarpickedupwwas %  usedinbankrobberyfromNewMexicoaO` ` (DEx.14,at1,lines1011). ( $" ` ` Michaelknowlarrysnameb/cshetoldhimit  ` ` (DEx.14,at2,line2).  12. ` Thus,theStatesMotionforRehearingconstructsafalseargument @ thatDEx.#14onlyconcernedthe invitationtoGailtogotoTennesseeandhispossibleromanticinterestinher.(Motionat3).TheStatedoesnotacknowledge,letaloneaddress,GailsstatementsabouthereffortstosellaboatforRoyston,anassertionthatshedidntthinkMichael(_Mordenti_)everlookedforbuyersfortheboat,orMichael_Milligan_sstatementsaboutpickingupacarinNewMexicoinJuneof1989,andthatGailhadtoldhim _larrys_Ԁname.SincethisCourtengagedinacumulativeanalysisofthefailuretodiscloseGailandMichael_Milligan_sstatements,selectionofonenarrowportionofthecumulativeanalysisseemssomewhatdishonestandcertainlyineffectual.  13. ` TheStatescontentionthatGailsdepositionrevealedallthatthe 0 defenseneededtoknow(i.e.,thatRoystonhadaskedherifshewantedtogotohishousein_Gatlinburg_ԀandshethoughtRoystonwasaveryniceperson)isjustfactuallywrong.@b  #  11      ׀ThenotesrevealstatementsbyGailthatarequalitatively $ differentthaneitherhertrialtestimonyorherdepositiontestimony.  14. ` Finally,theStateturnstothetestimonyofJohn_Trevena_.Here,too,   theStateresortstofactualinaccuraciesandmisrepresentation.TheStateasserts:` TheCourtseeminglyacknowledgesthatTrevenastestimonymaywellhaveconstitutedinadmissiblehearsay(slipopinonopinion,p.21)butconcludesthatevenifinadmissibleitwas relevantinformationthatwouldhaveleadthedefensetodiscoverevidencefortheimpeachmentofGail.Butwhatadditionalevidencewouldhavebeendiscovered?Roystonwas,andremains,deadandcanoffernofurthertestimonyonthetruthorfalsityofhisassertions.` WW(Motionat6).First,thisCourtsdiscussionaboutinadmissiblehearsayclearlyreferstothecircuitcourtsexclusionofJohn_Trevena_stestimonyattheevidentiaryhearing(SlipOp.at18).WhenMr._Mordenti_scounselaskedMr._Trevena_Ԁ whathappenedduringhisMarch20thmeetingwithNickandKarenCox(PCT.321), @ theStateobjectedsaying, itsinadmissible.Cd  #  12      ׀Itcouldntbeadmittedattrial,and ` afterreadingthesubstanceofthosenotes,theinformationisinadmissibleandwouldnthavebeenadmittedattrial(PCT.324).Thecircuitcourtsustainedtheobjection(PCT.326).Mr._Mordenti_ԀwaspermittedtoprofferwhatMr._Trevena_ p" toldtheprosecutorsduringtheMarch20thinterview,andMr._Trevena_Ԁwasdirected  toanswerthequestionsregardingwhatwasdiscussedintheinterview(PCT.32627).TheStatecompletelymisrepresentsintheMotiontheimportoftheCourtsdiscussionofwhetherMr._Trevena_stestimonywasinadmissiblehearsay.Clearly,thisCourtconcludeditdidnotneedtodecidewhetherMr._Treviena_stestimonywasadmissibleatthe3.850evidentiaryhearingbecausethenotesthemselveswhenintroducedrevealedthattheStatepossessedanddidnotdisclose relevantinformationthatwouldhaveledthedefensetodiscoverevidencefortheimpeachmentofGail.(SlipOp.at21).  15. ` TheStatesquestion,[_b]ut_Ԁwhatadditionalevidencewouldhavebeen   discovered(Motionat6),assumesthatwhatisknownalreadycannotbeusedandinsodoingdisplaysatbestignoranceofUnitedStatesSupremeCourtjurisprudence.In_Kyles_Ԁv.Whitley,514U.S.419(1995),anindividualnamed 0  Beaniehadassistedlawenforcementinputtingtogetheritscaseagainst_Kyles_.Beanie wasnotcalledasawitness ,thoughthedefensestheorywasthatBeanie p" hadframed_Kyles_Ԁ(514U.S.at429).Incollateralproceedings,itwasrevealedthatfavorableinformationintheStatespossessionhadbeenwithheldfromthedefense.Thenondisclosedevidenceincluded [_t]he_ԀprosecutorsnotesofhisinterviewwithBeanie(514U.S.at449).Infindingthenondisclosuresmaterial,theSupreme *H&$ CourtdidnotrequireproofthatthedefensewouldhavecalledBeaniehadtheundisclosedstatementsbeendisclosed( ifKyleslawyerhadfollowedthemoreconservativecourseofleavingBeanieoffthestand,thedefensecouldhaveexaminedthepolicetogoodeffectontheirknowledgeofBeaniesstatementsandsohaveattackedthereliabilityoftheinvestigation)(514U.S.at446).TheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtexplained, [_b]y_ԀdemonstratingthedetectivesknowledgeofBeaniesaffirmativelyselfincriminatingstatements,thedefensecouldhavelaidthefoundationforavigorousargumentthatthepolicehadbeenguiltyofnegligence.514U.S.at447.  16. ` Det.KingwaspresentfortheinterviewofMr._Trevena_Ԁ( mtgin   _Trevena_sofficew/DetKing)(DEx.#23;PCT.81).Asin_Kyles_,itisnot @ necessarytoputthe_declarant_Ԁonthewitnessstandtousehisstatementstolawenforcementtogoodeffect.Here,lawenforcementseffortstoinvestigatetheveracityofRoystonsstatementsregardingGailcouldhavebeenelicited.Det.KingcouldhavebeenexaminedregardingthesemattersexactlyastheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtsuggestedin_Kyles_.Ef  #  13       $   17. ` Finally,theState(maybesensingtheweaknessofitsargumentthatthe  informationcouldnotbeusedinanyfashion)asks, [_i]f_ԀanyofRoystonsassertionswereofferedforimpeachmentwouldtheStatebeentitledunderthedoctrineofcompletenesstobeallowed[sic]tointroducethecommentinDefenseExhibit23ofCoxsnotethatRoystonneversaid IhiredGailandMichaeltokillbutheprettymuchmadeitclear.(Motionat7).Theanswertothequestionis nobecausetheStatesquotefromthenoteistakenentirelyoutofcontextinordertocreateafalseimpression.Underthedoctrineofcompleteness,thewholecontextwouldhavetobeadmissibleiftheStatewantedtousethatquoteinisolation.Asthenotedemonstrates,thepassageinquestionappearsasfollows:` Thelmahadbeenblackmailing!shewasviolent+vociferous.He @ admittedaffairs.Hewantednodivorce!shedid.[T]houghtSherriwasbehindit.Vconfronted#nnN#nnw/settlementw/cash&distributionor ` IlltakeyoutotheIRS.notsurehowinvolvedSherriwas.Vputa  p timelimitonhim&hecouldnottakeit. Heneversaid IhiredGail 0 &MichaeltokillV#nnp#nnbutheprettymuchmadeitclear &wentwith D theseinthesealeddocument.Hewantedmanslaughter!maybe X  2nd.#nnq#nn h! Ѐ#nnr#nn x" ` oo(DEx.23)(Statesquoteinbold).OverlookedbytheStateinitszealtomisleadarethefollowingnotationslaterinthedocument:` nevertalkedtoco '#!     h   ***#nn;s#nnaskedJohnifMordentiwasthecowhenhe1stsawhim#nnt#nnԀ#nnPu#nnԀ#nnu#nn )8%# ` t.t(DEx.#23).John_Trevena_Ԁexplainedwhatthesenotesmeantwhenhetestified: ,X'% `  Q  Didheknow,inyourconversationandalsointermsof  whatyouindicatedtotheState,who,infact,hadcommittedthemurder,actuallywasthetriggerpersoninthehomicide? A  Hedidnot.Heindicatedtomethathedidnotknowwho 0 MichaelMordentiwasbyappearance,thathehadnotmethimuntilthefirstoccasionthattheyappearedtogetherincourtand,infact,hadaskedme,isthatthecodefendant?IsthatMr.Mordenti?HetheorizedthatGailmayhavetakenituponherselftohiresomeoneunknowntohimtokillhiswifeinordertofreehimupsohecouldmarryher.@??,D***HehadnoknowledgeaboutMichael_Mordenti_,sohewasnotinapositiontoconfirmordenytheallegationsagainsthim,otherthantolettheStateknowthatGailhadsetthisup.ShemayhavehiredMichael_Mordenti_,shemayhavehiredsomeoneelse,buthewasnotdirectlyinvolvedanditwasnotathisbehesttocontractthiskilling.` vv(PCT.331,333).  18. ` WhatismostdisturbingabouttheStatesmotionisthefactthatthe 0 Statedoesnotunderstanditsconstitutionalobligations: theStatefailedtodiscloseinformationobtainedfrominterviewswithkeywitnessescoupledwithmisrepresentationsbytheprosecutor(SlipOp.at24).SincetheStatewillnotacknowledgeitsbreachofitsconstitutionalobligations,thesekindsofdueprocessviolationswillonlycontinuetobecommitted.  19. ` Mr._Mordenti_Ԁhasbeenondeathrowforoverthirteen(13)yearsfora %  crimehedidnotcommit.ThisCourthasnowrecognizedthathistrialwasriddledwithgraveconstitutionalerror.Anewtrialfreefromconstitutionalerrorhasnowbeenordered.However,byfilingthisinsubstantialandseriouslyflawedmotionfor ,P'% rehearing,theStatehasfurtherdelayedthestartofthatnewtrial.UnderFla.R._Crim_.Pro.3.191(m),Mr._Mordenti_srighttobetriedwithinninety(90)daysistiedtothisCourtsissuanceofthemandate.TheStatesMotionforRehearingshouldnotbepermittedtofurtherdelaytheconstitutionallyadequateadversarialtestingtowhichMr._Mordenti_Ԁwasentitled,butdeprivedof,overthirteen(13)yearsago.  WHEREFORE,basedontheforegoing,Mr._Mordenti_ԀrequeststhattheCourtdenytheStatesMotionforRehearing,and/orgrantanyotherreliefasdeemedproper.@  CERTIFICATEOFSERVICE     IHEREBYCERTIFYthatatruecopyoftheforegoingOppositiontoStatesMotionforRehearinghasbeenfurnishedbyUnitedStatesMail,firstclasspostageprepaid,toRobertLandry,AssistantAttorneyGeneral,ConcourseCenter4,3507E.FrontageRd.,Suite200,Tampa,Florida33607onJanuary3,2005.  8    `    Respectfullysubmitted,   `       `     h   ?U'= hdE$h? $    `     h   MARTINJ.MCCLAIN   `     h   AttorneyatLaw   `     h   FloridaBarNo.0754773   `     h   141NE30thStreet   `     h   WiltonManors,FL33334   `     h   (305)9848344   `     h   COUNSELFOR_MR_._MORDENTI_ #nnu#ԃ