FLORIDA

COMMISSION ON CAPITAL, CASES

Case Histories

Locke Burt, Chairman

Commission on Capital Cases - Commission Members

Commission on Capital Cases - Commission History

Project Introduction

Project Statistics

Anthony Brown

Joseph Brown

Willie Brown & Larry Troy

Robert Cox

Andrew Golden

Joseph Green

Robert Hayes

Sonia Jacobs

Anibal Jaramillo

William Jent & Ernest Miller

Dave Keaton

Wilbert Lee & Freddie Pitts

Joaquin Martinez

Ernest Miller & William Jent

Anthony Peek

Freddie Pitts & Wilbert Lee

Juan Ramos

James Richardson

Bradley Scott

Frank Lee Smith

Joseph Spaziano

Larry Troy & Willie Brown

Delbert Tibbs

Cases ofhnocence, DPIC, Case Summaries

COMMISSION ON CAPITAL CASES

402 S. Monroe Street

Tallahassee, FL 323 99- 13 00

Phone: (850) 921-4704 + SC: 291-4704 +Fax: (850) 921-4737

E-mail: Comm.CanitalCases@Jeg.state.fl.us

Honorable Locke Burt - Chair

State Senator, District 16

140 S. Atlantic Ave., Suite 201

Ormond Beach, FL 32176 386/673-7299

Honorable Charles E. Miner, Jr. - Vice Chair

Judge, First District Court of Appeal

301 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.

Tallahassee, FL 32399-1850 850/487-1000

Honorable Walter "Skip" Campbell

State Senator, District 33

10094 McNab Road

Tamarac, FL 33321 9541346-2813

Honorable Sally A. Heyman

State Representative, District 105

1100 NE 163 Street, Ste. 303

North Miami Beach, FL 33162 305/919-1888

Honorable Randy Ball

State Representative, District 29

400 South Street, Suite 1-C

Titusville, FL 32780 321/383-5151

Commission Staff:

Roger Maas, Executive Director -- maas.roger@leg.state.fl.us

Wendy Schulte, Research Staff Supervisor

Research Assistants:

James Ledbetter, B.A., M.A., Ph.D. Student

Nicole Prior, B.S., M.A., Ph.D. Student

History

The Commission on Capital Cases was statutorily created in 1997. Chapter 27.709,

Florida Statutes, provides that the commission "shall review the administration of justice

in capital collateral cases, receive relevant public input, review the operation of the

Capital Collateral Regional Counsel offices (CCRC), and advise and make

recommendations to the Governor, Legislature, and the Supreme Court."

In 1996, the McDonald Commission recommended the transformation of the office of

Capital Collateral Representative (CCR), which represented inmates in capital collateral

appeals, into three separate offices that were divided by region. The three collateral

appellate offices became known as the Capital Collateral Regional Counsel (CCRC).

Following another recommendation of the McDonald Commission, the Commission on

Capital Cases was established to oversee the offices of the Capital Collateral Regional

Counsel, as well as to create and oversee a registry of attorneys designed to handle the

overflow of cases from the Capital Collateral Regional Counsel offices.

Roger Maas, the commission’s executive director, was appointed by the late Governor

Chiles to be the interim Capital Collateral Representative director and was charged with

the overseeing of the transition into the three offices of the Capital Collateral Regional

Counsel.

The Commission on Capital Cases is comprised of diverse members recognized as being

knowledgeable in criminal justice issues and experts in their respective fields. As a result

of their leadership, Florida has one of the most comprehensive and well-funded collateral

Project Introduction

In response to the increased scrutiny of Florida’s capital cases; specifically, a recent study

claiming that Florida has the highest rate of death row releases, the commission has

researched in-depth the 23 cited cases where individuals have been released from death row.

Of these 23 inmates, none were found "innocent," even when acquitted, because no such

verdict exists. A defendant is found guilty or not guilty, never innocent. The guilt of only

four defendants, however, was ever truly doubted: Freddie Lee Pitts and Wilbert Lee were

pardoned by Governor Askew and the Cabinet, citing substantial doubt of their guilt, Frank

Lee Smith died before the results of DNA testing excluded him as the perpetrator of the

sexual assault, and the State chose not to retry James Richardson due to newly discovered

evidence and the suspicion of another perpetrator. An analysis of the remaining 19 inmates

can be divided into three categories that account for their releases: (1) six cases were

remanded due to evidence issues, (2) an additional seven were remanded in light of witness

issues, and (3) the remaining six were remanded as a result of issues involving court officials.

Further examination of all 23 inmates yielded various case dispositions. Eight of the 23 had

their cases either dropped, nolle prossed, or dismissed by the State. The reasons as to why the

State chose not to pursue the cases are as followed: witness recantation, the wish not to

subject witnesses to further trials, the death of witnesses, and lost or missing evidence. Ten

inmates were either acquitted at retrial or their cases were remanded for an acquittal. Of the

remaining, two pled to a lesser charge, one died in custody, and the Governor and Cabinet

) pardoned the remaining two.

W., Cox, Green, Hayes, Jacobs, Jaramillo, Keaton, Lee, Scott, Smith, Spaziano and

’ Anthony Peek was found guilty at his first retrial, and not guilty at the second retrial.

’ This information does not include the criminal histories of seven inmates: Joseph Brown, Andrew Golden, William Jent, Joaquin

Martinez, Ernest Miller, Juan Ramos and James Richardson.

’ This infonnation does not include the criminal histories of six inmates: Joseph Brown, William Jent, Joaquin Martinez, Ernest Miller, Juan

Newly discovered evidence*

Problems with evidence

Witness Credibility

Recanted Testimony

Inability to cross-examine

Ineffective assistance of counsel

Discovery violation

Comments made by judge

FSC

USDC

USCA

cc

Direct Appeal

3.850 Motion

Habeas Appeal

Pardon

Dropped, dismissed, nolle prossed by the State

Acquitted at the retrial

Remanded for acquittal

Pled to a lesser charge

Pardoned by Governor

Since 1985

Since 1995

(6/23)

(l/23)

(2/23)

(3/23)

(7/23)

(2/23)

(l/23)

(l/23)

(3/23)

(6/23)

(2/23)

(2/23)

(l/23)

(l/23)

(4/23)

(14/23)

(3123)

(l/23)

(3123)

(2/23)

(15/23)

(3123)

(l/23)

(2123)

(2/23)

(8/23)

(6/23)

(4/23)

(2/23)

(2/23)

(l/23)

(6123)

30.4%

30.4%

26.1%

13%

61%

13%

4%

13%

9%

65%

13%

4%

9%

9%

35%

26%

17%

9%

9%

4%

26%

* Includes Frank Lee Smith who was excluded, posthumously, as the perpetrator of the sexual assault

irown, Anthony 07/27/1983 FSC found that the State’s failure to notify 09/17/90 - Received a 30-year sentence fo

Brown of pretrial deposition was reversible Aggravated Battery with a Deadly

error. On retrial, Brown was acquitted due Weapon. He also received a charge of

to witness recantation. Introducing a Controlled Substance into a

Detention Facility for which he received

an additional three years on 06/18/96.

trown, Joseph 07/03/1974 Conviction reversed by Federal Court There is no information available as to

because, contrary to the co-defendant’s Joseph Brown’s criminal history

testimony, he had received immunity in subsequent to his release.

exchange for his testimony against Brown,

and the state did not correct the false

testimony.

irown, Willie A. 07/19/1983 FSC found that the failure to conduct a Brown sentenced to life for multiple

key, Larry Richardson hearing for an alleged discovery crimes committed in 1999. Troy

violation was reversible error. The State sentenced to 12 years imprisonment for a

dropped the charges when a key witness 1991 Cocaine Sale conviction and was

recanted. arrested on 02/O l/O2 for Smuggling

Contraband and Cocaine Possession.

Iox, Robert 10/06/1988 FSC reversed on Direct Appeal, finding Prior to the indictment on the Florida case,

that evidence was insufficient to support Cox was serving two nine-year sentences

conviction. for kidnapping and assault. After his

release from prison in Florida, he was

arrested in 1995 for holding a gun on a 12.

year-old girl in Decatur, Texas. He is

presently serving a life sentence for that

robbery.

iolden, Andrew 11/15/l 99 1 FSC reversed on Direct Appeal, finding the Andrew Golden is presently serving a

evidence was insufficient to establish guilt fifteen-year sentence in Texas for three

beyond a reasonable doubt. separate cases of Indecency with a Child.

ireen, Joseph 1 l/30/1993 FSC reversed and ordered a new trial due to After acquittal, Green was sentenced to

tahume a bad search warrant and improper cross- two one-year terms for two cocaine

examination of a defense witness by the possession charges that occurred in 2000.

State. Acquitted by the judge at the retrial. He was released from prison on 1 l/05/01.

There is no information available as to

Green’s criminal history subsequent to his

release.

Iayes, Robert 06/05/1992 Conviction reversed due to a Williams Rule According to NCIC’, Robert Hayes has

violation and due to the admittance DNA had no arrests subsequent to his release.

evidence that had not met the m

Standard. Hayes was acquitted on retrial.

acobs, Sonia 08/20/1976 FSC affirmed the conviction but reduced Sonia Jacobs is presently living in Ireland

Jacobs’ sentence to life, finding the jury and, according to NCIC, has not had any

recommendation of life reasonable. In a arrests subsequent to her release.

Habeas review, the 1 lth Circuit Court of

Appeals remanded for a new trial after

finding Brady and Miranda violations.

Jaramillo, Anibal 04/08/198 1 FSC reversed because the State’s evidence Anibal Jaramillo was deported to

was not inconsistent with Jaramillo’s Colombia subsequent to his release and

reasonable hypothesis of innocence. was murdered there.

Jent, William 01/30/1980 After Federal District Court remanded for a There is no information available as to Jer

Miller, Ernest new trial based on a Brady violation, Jent or Miller’s criminal history subsequent to

and Miller were allowed to go free on time their release.

served in exchange for guilty pleas to

Second-Degree Murder.

Keaton, David 05/l l/1971 Sentence under pre-Furman statute Subsequent to his release, Keaton was

automatically reduced to life by USSC. arrested on a DUI charge. NCIC does not

Upon review of the life sentence, the FSC show any other arrests.

reversed based on claim of newly

discovered evidence.

Martinez, Joaquin 05/21/1997 FSC reversed and ordered a new trial due to There is no information available as to

improper comments by a State witness as to Martinez’s criminal history subsequent to

the guilt of Martinez. Martinez was his release.

acquitted at retrial.

Peek, Anthony 05/02/1978 FSC reversed the case after fmding that it Peek is currently incarcerated in Florida,

was error to admit evidence of a collateral serving a life sentence for Sexual Battery.

rape. Peek was acquitted after a new trial.

Lee, Wilbert Pit&, 08/28/1963 Sentences reduced to life by Furman. First According to NCIC reports, neither Pins

Freddie conviction was remanded for new trial after nor Lee have had any subsequent arrests.

another man confessed to the murders.

During retrial, the confession was ruled

inadmissible and Pitts and Lee were

convicted again. They were pardoned in

1975.

Ramos, Juan 03/10/1983 FSC reversed and remanded for new trial There is no information available as to

due to scientifically unreliable evidence Ramos’ criminal history subsequent to his

admitted at trial. Acquitted by jury at acquittal.

second trial.

Richardson, James 0513 l/1968 Richardson’s conviction and life sentence There was no available information

were reversed on post conviction on a regarding Richardson’s arrest history

newly discovered evidence claim. He was subsequent to release.

not retried.

Scott, Bradley 02/08/1988 Due to the 7-year delay before an

indictment was issued, FSC reversed,

noting that prejudice was established

because evidence did not rebut every

reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

According to NCIC, Bradley Scott has hat

no arrests subsequent to release.

Smith, Frank Lee 04/14/1985 After his death, Smith was excluded as the Died in custody.

perpetrator of the sexual assault, through

the use of DNA evidence.

Spaziano, Joseph 07/16/1976 Based on the recantation of testimony by a Spaziano is currently serving a 23-year

primary witness, Spaziano entered a plea of sentence for the Second-Degree Murder.

no contest to Second-Degree Murder. He is also serving a life sentence for

Sexual Battery and five years for

Aggravated Battery.

Tibbs, Delbert 0312411975 FSC reversed for new trial because the According to NCIC, Delbert Tibbs has hat

conviction rested solely on identification by no arrests subsequent to release.

the victim. The State later dropped the

BROWN, Anthony S. (B/M)

DC# 838162

DOB: 03/28/56

First Judicial Circuit, Escambia County, Case #82-5992

Sentencing Judge: The Honorable Joseph Q. Tarbuck

Trial Attorney: Robert A. Dennis, Jr., Private

Attorney, Direct Appeal: Michael Minerva, Assistant Public Defender

Date of Offense: 12121182

Date of Sentence: 07127183

Circumstances of the Offense:

Evidence collected by the police indicated that the Veteran’s Gas Company received a

phone call from an individual who identified herself as Annie Rivers at 3:30 p.m. on

12/2 l/82. The female requested that the minimum amount of gas be delivered to 3905

Pine Forest Road. Five minutes later, the same individual called back questioning where

the gas was. The order was relayed, via the dispatcher, to deliveryman James Dassinger,

the victim. Dassinger never returned from his route and the gas company called the police

and reported him missing around 6:00 p.m. that night.

Deputy Schultz went to the neighborhood and stopped at a house to inquire about the

location of the address of the gas request. Wydell Rogers, who was visiting a friend,

answered the door at this house. He admitted that the address in question was his, but he

denied any knowledge of the gas request. Deputy Schultz then went to Roger’s residence

(the address of the gas request) and found the gas truck and the body of James Dassinger.

There was no wallet found on the body. There was a large wound under the armpit. A pad

was found in the truck with a list of names; Annie Rivers was the last name on the list.

Two 410-shotgun shells were found at the scene. Two shoeprints that resembled tennis-

shoe prints were found about 150 feet southeast fi-om the house. An employee from the

Veteran’s Gas Company identified the body and indicated that no gas had been delivered

to the house and that approximately $225.00 was missing.

During the inspection of the scene, Anthony Brown appeared at the address. Blood

spatters had been found in the truck, and Brown had a small spot of blood on the watch

that he was wearing. The watch was taken into evidence, and Brown was asked to go to

the station for questioning. There he was advised of his rights and signed a waiver. In his

statement, Brown declared that he was a friend of Rogers and had stopped by for a visit

and that he was at a pool hall in Atmore, Alabama, earlier in the day. In a later statement,

Brown, A. 2

the pool hall and then had returned. Brown had a fresh track mark on his arm, possibly

from an infection. Rogers was questioned on 12/21/89 and 12/22/89. He did not show up

for further questioning on 12/26-28/89. On 12/29/89, authorities found an unserved

warrant for Grand Theft on Rogers. He was spotted by an officer and promptly taken to

the police station. During the questioning, Rogers stated that he knew who was involved

in the robbery and the killing and named Brown and Ulysses Robinson. During the initial

stage of the interrogation, Rogers did not implicate himself, but later on testified and

admitted to participating in the robbery conspiracy.

Rogers testified that he stated that he arrived at the Oaks Tavern around 1:30 p.m. and

was sitting in his car in the parking lot with David Davis, Brown approached the car and

asked Rogers to get out of the car. Brown detailed his idea for the crime to Rogers, and

Rogers stated that he would go along with it. Rogers’ statements led to the conclusion

that it was Brown’s idea to commit the robbery. Brown got into the car and the three men

drove to Brown’s mother’s house to get a change of clothes. They drove to the Jr. Food

Store, where Brown and Rogers used the phone. Brown called information and got the

number to Veteran’s Gas Company. He then used Rogers’ girlfriend’s name, and called

the gas company and ordered 50 gallons of gas in a female voice. The three men drove to

Rogers’ house and got a 410-shotgun and some shells that were under the house. Brown

loaded the gun and stayed at the house. The plan was for him to hide in the bushes and

wait for the deliveryman. Rogers drove to the gas station down the street and waited until

he saw the gas truck. He then went to pick up Brown after the allotted five minutes.

Brown was not at the designated spot. Rogers then drove back toward the gas station and

saw Brown standing on the side of the road. Brown did not have the shotgun. Rogers

picked Brown up, and Brown stated that he had killed the deliveryman. Brown had a

wallet and a check. When Brown got out of the car he placed $50 over the visor and

stated it was in case anyone inquired as to whether Rogers could pay for the gas.

At the trial, Brown testified to a different sequence of events. He had been home until

approximately 1:30 p.m. on 12/21/89. He then drove to Oaks Tavern and saw Rogers.

Next, he bought a six-pack of beer and took it to the tavern and drank it. At

approximately 3:30 p.m., Brown asked Rogers to take him home. He then walked back to

the tavern around 4:30 p.m. Brown and two other individuals then went to Atmore; they

bought gas and dope. Brown returned to the Oaks Tavern and then proceeded to Roger’s

house to give him some pills. Brown stated that he did not know where the blood on his

watch came from. Brown also testified that Rogers had pulled a sawed-off shotgun on

him several months earlier.

Fingerprints found in the truck did not match Rogers’ or Brown’s. Davis was never

fingerprinted; thus his fingerprints were never compared to the fingerprints found inside

the truck. Two of the charges against Rogers were nolle prossed because of insufficient

evidence and information. The pathologist testified that the cause of death was a gunshot

from close range - within an inch. The death was almost instantaneous because of the

Brown, A. 3

prr4 Additional Information:

In 1974, Brown was arrested for Aggravated Assault twice and given one year and five-

years probation. In 197.5, he was arrested for Breaking and Entering; the charges were

nolle prossed. In 1980, Brown was arrested for Aggravated Assault and Battery and

Burglary and was given a one-year suspended sentence and one year of probation. In

January of 1983, while out on bail from the murder charge, Brown was arrested for

Possession of a Firearm by a Convicted Felon; the charges were dismissed.

Codefendant Information:

Wydell Rogers entered a plea bargain and pled guilty to a charge of Second-Degree

Murder and Robbery with a Firearm in exchange for his testimony against Brown. Rogers

received a life sentence for the murder and 15 years for the robbery.

During Brown’s retrial, Rogers recanted his testimony. He received three counts of

perjury and was sentenced to five years for each. Rogers is currently incarnated at

Wakulla C.I.

Trial Summary:

01/l l/83 Defendant indicted on the following charges:

1 Count I: First-Degree Murder

Count II: Armed Robbery

Count III: Possession of a Firearm by a Convicted Felon

07/l 5183 The defendant was found guilty of the following:

Count I: First-Degree Murder

Count II: Armed Robbery

07/l 5183 A majority of the jury recommended that the defendant receive a life

sentence.

07/27/83 The defendant was sentenced as follows:

Count I: First-Degree Murder - death

Count II: Armed Robbery - no separate sentence imposed

09/01/83 The defendant nolle prossed for count III

09/27/85 Motion for retrial filed

02/l O/86 Jury trial held

Brown, A. 4

Florida State Supreme Court, Direct Appeal

FSC# 64,247

471 So. 2d 6

09116183

05/02/85

07/l l/85

08/20/85

Appeal filed

FSC reversed the conviction and sentence and remanded the case for a

new trial.

Rehearing denied

Mandate issued

Case Information:

Brown filed a Direct Appeal with the Florida Supreme Court on 09/l 6/83. The main issue

raised in the appeal was that, prior to trial, the State held a deposition, without Brown

present, of a deputy sheriff, who would be unavailable at trial. The Florida Supreme

Court found the State’s failure to follow Rule 3.190 created the fundamental error of not

allowing Brown to confront and cross-examine the witnesses testifying against him. The

Court ruled that this error was not correctable and, therefore, vacated Brown’s sentence

and conviction on 05/02/85. The case was remanded to the circuit court for a new trial.

The rehearing was denied on 07/l l/85, and the mandate was issued on 08/20/85.

On 09/27/85, a motion for retrial was entered into the circuit court. A notice of trial was

issued on 10/09/85. On 02/10/86, the jury trial was held and on 02/14/86, Brown was

acquitted on the charges of First-Degree Murder and Armed Robbery. The main reason

for Brown’s acquittal was that Wydell Rogers recanted his testimony.

05/23/02 Judge Novotney, the state attorney who tried Brown, had retired at the

time of this summary. She was traveling and unable to be reached for

comment.

05/23/02

Letter sent requesting comment to Escambia County Sheriffs Department.

Information requested via telephone call to Escambia County Sheriffs

Department. No information has been received as of 05/28/02.

05123102

Letter sent requesting comment to Mr. Robert A. Dennis, Jr.

Telephone call placed to Mr. Dennis who indicated that he would e-mail

Brown, A. 5

Current Status:

In August 1987, Brown was arrested for Armed Robbery, Possession of a Firearm in the

Commission of a Felony, Aggravated Assault, and Larceny; the charges were dismissed.

In September 1987, Brown was arrested for robbery and again the charges were

dismissed. Brown is currently serving a 30-year sentence for Aggravated Battery with a

Deadly Weapon. The offense occurred on 02/20/90, and Brown was sentenced on

09/l 7/90. He also received a charge of Introducing a Controlled Substance into a

Detention Facility for which he received an additional three years on 06/l 8/96.

BROWN, Joseph Green (B/M)

DC # 042546

DOB: 1 O/02/50

Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Hillsborough County, Case # 73-2 180

Sentencing Judge: The Honorable Robert W. Rawlins, Jr.

Attorney, Criminal Trial: J. Michael Shea, Esq.

Attorney, Direct Appeal: J. Michael Shea, Esq.

Date of Offense: 07/07/73

Date of Sentence: 07/03/74

Circumstances of Offense:

Joseph Green Brown was convicted and sentenced to death for the 07/07/73 rape and

murder of Earlene Evans Barksdale.

Ronald Floyd revealed the relevant facts of this case at trial. Floyd was with Joseph

Brown prior to the crime and immediately afterwards. Floyd testified that on 07/07/73,

he, Brown, and a third man, known as "Poochie," drove to the store where the murder

would take place. Floyd, reportedly unaware of his companion’s intentions, waited in the

car while Brown and Poochie entered the store. Floyd noted, however, that prior to

entering the clothing store, Brown had what appeared to be a gun under his shirt. After

waiting about 15 minutes, Floyd exited the car and walked over to the entrance of the

store. Floyd recalled hearing a gunshot, after which he immediately entered the store.

Inside the store, Floyd peered over the counter and saw the body of Earlene Evans

Barksdale lying close to a rear storage room. Brown, Floyd and Poochie fled the scene

and, while speeding away, Poochie exclaimed to Brown, "Man, you didn’t have to do

that." Barksdale’s body was found at 9:30 p.m. that evening. She had been raped and

shot to death.

The same night of the Barksdale murder, Brown and Floyd robbed a couple at a motel

and Brown sexually assaulted the woman (CC # 73-1338). Brown turned himself in to

authorities the following day and implicated Floyd in the motel robbery and sexual

assault. He and Floyd were arrested, and the man known as "Poochie" was never located.

Brown alerted police to the location of the gun used in the motel robbery, which belonged

to a man named Raymond Vinson. Vinson’s car was also used in the robbery, and he

charged as an accomplice in the crime. Vinson’s gun, the one used in the motel robbery,

Brown, J. 2

Joseph Brown’s convictions for the rape, robbery and murder of Earlene Barksdale were

based primarily on the testimony of Ronald Floyd. At trial, Floyd recalled that the day

following the murder, he, Brown, and Raymond Vinson heard a radio broadcast about the

Barksdale murder. Floyd claimed he stated something to the effect of "People will do

anything these days" to which Brown replied, "Yes, she should have never done what she

did." The testimony of Vinson corroborated that such a conversation did, in fact, take

place. Floyd testified that he later confronted Brown directly, asking him if he killed

Barksdale. Brown reportedly answered yes and then made some lewd comment

indicating that he had had sex with her.

There was no fingerprint evidence linking Brown to the Barksdale murder, and the only

physical evidence implicating Brown was Vinson’s gun. State ballistic reports could not

prove, however, that the bullet that killed Barksdale came from Vinson’s gun.

Trial Summary:

f--.

11 IO7173

06128174

07/01/74

07/03/74

Defendant indicted on the following:

Count I: First-Degree Murder

Count II: Rape

Count III: Robbery

The jury found the defendant guilty on all counts.

Upon advisory sentencing, the jury recommended, by a majority vote, that

the defendant be sentenced to death.

The defendant was sentenced as followed:

Count I: First-Degree Murder - Death

Count II: Rape - Life

Count III: Robbery - Life

Florida Supreme Court, Direct Appeal

FSC # 46,925

381 So. 2d 690 (Fla. 1980)

02/l 8175 Appeal filed.

01/31/80 FSC affirmed the convictions and sentence.

04/21/80 Rehearing denied.

Florida Supreme Court, Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

FSC # 59,732

392 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 1981)

09/29/80 Petition filed.

Brown, J. 3

United States Supreme Court, Petition for Writ of Certiorari

USSC # 80-5708

449 U.S. 1118; 101 S. Ct. 931; 66 L. Ed. 2d 847 (U.S. 1981)

12/17/80 Petition filed.

01/19/81 Petition denied.

United States Supreme Court, Petition for Writ of Certiorari

USSC # 80-6434

454 U.S. 1000; 102 S. Ct. 542; 70 L. Ed. 2d 407 (U.S. 1981)

04/03/8 1

11 I0218 1

Petition filed.

Petition denied.

State Circuit Court, Motion to Vacate Judgment and Sentence (3.850)

CC # 73-2180

05/l 8183

1 O/04/83

Motion filed.

Motion denied.

Florida Supreme Court, 3.850 Appeal & Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis

FSC # 64,348

439 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 1983)

1 O/07/83

10/12/83

Appeal filed.

Denial affirmed.

United States District Court, Middle District, Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

USDC # 83-1287-Civ-T-10

1 O/14/83

03/06/85

Petition filed.

Petition denied.

United States Court of Appeals for the llfh Circuit, Habeas Appeal

USCA # 85-32 17

785 F.2d 1457 (U.S. 1986)

03126185

03/l 7186

Appeal filed.

USCA reversed the denial reached by the USDC, ordering the Habeas to

Brown, J. 4

09123183

1 O/27/83

Death warrant signed by Governor Bob Graham.

Stay of execution granted by the United States District Court, Middle

District.

Clemency

10/12/82 Clemency hearing held (denied).

Case Information:

While on Direct Appeal to the Florida Supreme Court, questions arose concerning the

veracity of Ronald Floyd’s testimony that he was not given an immunity agreement by

the State in exchange for his testimony against Brown. While in prison on a completely

separate robbery conviction, Floyd gave Brown’s defense counsel an affidavit in which

he recanted his trial testimony and noted that the State offered "favorable consideration"

in the motel robbery and in the Barksdale murder in exchange for his testimony against

Brown. The Florida Supreme Court remanded to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing

on the issues raised in Floyd’s affidavit. At the hearing, Floyd reaffirmed his trial

testimony and the court denied Brown’s motion for a new trial. While still on Direct

Appeal, the Florida Supreme Court remanded the case for a second time for an

1 evidentiary hearing based on an alleged Bvady violation’. Brown contended that the State

had statements made by Floyd to his counsel that should have been furnished to the

defense before trial. The trial court again denied Brown’s motion for a new trial, stating

that Brown’s defense received everything it was entitled to. The Florida Supreme Court

noted that Floyd’s testimony at the 1975 evidentiary hearing claiming that he had not

entered into an immunity agreement with the State matched his trial testimony, regardless

of what he stated in the affidavit. As such, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed his

convictions and sentence on 01 I3 l/80.

Brown next filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari in the United States Supreme Court,

which was denied on 01/19/81.

Brown additionally filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, essentially claiming a

Gardner viohtion2, which was denied on 01/15/81. He then filed a Petition for Writ of

Certiorari in the United States Supreme Court, which was denied on 1 l/02/8 1.

Brown subsequently filed a Motion to Vacate Judgment and Sentence (3.850) in the State

Circuit Court. Brown alleged ineffective assistance of counsel during the guilt and

penalty phases of his criminal trial. Following an evidentiary hearing on the issue, the

State Circuit Court denied all relief. Brown filed an appeal of that decision in the Florida

’ Brad’ violation - an error committed when the State fails to disclose exculpatory evidence to the defense

2 Gardner violation - a sentencing error committed when the trial judge considers information unknown to

Brown, J. 5

Ronald Floyd’s recanted testimony. In the video, Floyd outlined his motivation for

testifying against Brown, primarily his fear that the State Attorney’s Office would

prosecute him for the same crimes that Brown was charged with. Floyd stated, that in

exhange for his testimony against Brown, he was promised that he would not be charged

with murder and would receive "favorable consideration" in another criminal case.

Brown presented this new evidence as the basis for his Petition for Writ of Error Coram

Nobis. He argued that, had this information been known to the trial court, "it

conclusively would have prevented entry of the judgment." Having examined the issue

of Floyd’s recantation in a previous evidentiary hearing, the Florida Supreme Court noted

that Floyd reaffirmed his trial testimony. Brown claimed that Floyd’s retraction was

caused by fear of prosecution for perjury. Since his counsel failed to object to the issue

during the hearing and did not raise the issue on appeal, the Florida Supreme Court

opined that Brown did not have credible grounds for his Petition for Writ of Error Coram

Nobis.

,-,

Brown next filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus in the United States District Court,

Middle District. In that petition, he asserted that the State knowingly presented false

evidence to the jury when they failed to disclose that Ronald Floyd had, in fact, received

"favorable consideration" for his crimes and allowed him to testify to the contrary. The

District Court recognized that a deal had been made between Floyd and the State, as

evident in proffered testimony given by the State; however, the court held that Brown

was not entitled to the writ because he had failed to show that Floyd’s false testimony

was "material" to his conviction. The high court denied Brown’s Petition for Writ of

Habeas Corpus on 03/06/85. Brown filed an appeal of that decision in the United States

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit on 03126185. The Court of Appeals also

acknowledged that a deal had been made between Floyd and the State and decided to

further examine the issue of materiality. In Giglio v. U.S., the Supreme Court held, that

in a case where the State knowingly introduces false evidence that "[a] new trial is

required if ‘the false testimony could . . . in any reasonable likelihood have affected the

judgment of the jury. . . ." In noting that the prosecution presented Floyd’s false

testimony that he did NOT receive a deal from the State, the Court of Appeals

commented, "The government has a duty not to exploit false testimony by prosecutorial

argument affirmatively urging to the jury the truth of what it knows to be false." The

Court of Appeals ruled that the knowledge that Floyd had been given a plea arrangement

in exchange for his testimony against Brown would have affected his credibility as a

witness and would have undoubtedly been "material" to Brown’s conviction. Floyd’s

testimony was material in that it was the only evidence that Brown admitted to killing

and raping Barksdale and was the only evidence that placed him at the scene. As such,

the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reversed the order of the

District Court and ordered that Brown’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus be granted.

Brown’s convictions and sentence were overturned on 1 O/06/86, and charges against him

./--"- 3 Writ of Error Coram Nobis - A writ of error directed to a court for a review of its own judgment and

A letter requesting comment was sent to the Hillsborough County Sheriffs Department

on 05/01/02. That request was forwarded to the Tampa Police Department on 05/09/02.

The Tampa Police Department responded by mailing a copy of the case file.

Henry Lavandera, who handled the Brown case solely during post-conviction

proceedings as an Assistant State Attorney, issued the following statement on the State’s

decision to nolle prosse the case:

I did not nolle prosse the case against Mr. Brown because I felt he was

innocent, I nolle prossed it because I could not prove beyond and to the

exclusion of every reasonable doubt that he was guilty.

The Eleventh Circuit’s opinion provides an excellent recitation of the facts

of the case and the legal issues involved. Of note is the fact that one of the

reasons argued by Mr. Brown for reversal was that there was insufficient

evidence of his guilt. However, as stated on page 1467 of the opinion, Mr.

Brown abandoned that issue and did not raise it on appeal. That is

tantamount to an admission that there was sufficient evidence. Of note as

well, is the fact that the Court did not reverse and discharge the case, but

rather the Court remanded the case with instructions that the writ be issued

"subject to the right of the state to retry Brown." As stated in the opinion,

the case centered almost entirely around the testimony of Mr. Floyd. There

were no fingerprints or any other trace evidence. There was no firearms

identification evidence as to the weapon involved, and there were no eye

witnesses unless Mr. Floyd’s trial testimony were to be believed. From the

time of the Court’s decision, until the day I nolle prossed the case, I and

investigators from the SAO attempted to assemble a case in order to retry

Mr. Brown. We went to state prison to interview Mr. Floyd who persisted

that he had lied at trial. It was that fact above any other that compelled me

to nolle prosse the case. Whether I believe that Mr. Floyd was being

truthful or not is of no consequence. For me to have proceeded to trial

under those circumstances would have been, in my opinion, a violation of

my oath. Finally, it should be noted that Mr. Brown pled guilty to the

motel robbery. I don’t recall his sentence, but he would have been doing

prison time irrespective of the outcome of the Barksdale case.

Defense Statements:

Defense counsel J. Michael Shea referred all inquiries about this case to his book,

Brown, J. 7

Current Status:

There is no information available as to Joseph Brown’s criminal history subsequent to his

release.

04/30/02 - ew

05/02/02 - approved - ws

BROWN, Willie A. (B/M) TROY, Larry (B/M)

DC# 022323 DC# 022401

DOB: 06/06/50 DOB: 07/24/50

Eighth Judicial Circuit, Union County, Case # 82-l 63

Sentencing Judge: The Honorable John J. Crews

Trial Attorneys: Bill Salmon, Esq. & Daniel Mazar, Esq.

Direct Appeal Attorneys: Philip Padovano, Patrick Doherty, Esq.

& Steven Bolotin, Assistant Public Defender

Date of Offense: 07/07/8 1

Date of Sentence: 07/l 9183

Circumstances of Offense:

Union Correctional Institution (U.C.I.) inmate Earl Owens was stabbed to death by two

The State called U.C.I. inmates Frank Wise, Claude Smith and Herman Watson to testify

as to the events surrounding the murder of Earl Owens. Frank Wise testified that he heard

noises coming from Owens’ cell at the time of the murder and saw inmates Willie Brown

and Larry Troy emerge from the cell carrying a towel or shirt with something wrapped in

it. Wise testified that he did not notice any blood on Brown’s or Troy’s clothing. Claude

Smith testified that he heard a scream from Owens’ blanket-draped cell at the time of the

murder and saw Brown and Troy, both with blood on their clothes, leave the cell.

Herman Watson testified to a conversation that he had with Troy on the afternoon of the

murder, with Troy laughingly confiding in Watson that he (Troy) had "killed the

cracker." Watson further testified that Brown asked Watson to get rid of Brown’s clothes

and shoes, which Watson did.

The State also called U.C.I. employees, Mitchell Anderson and Donald Conner to testify.

Anderson, a correctional officer, testified that on the morning after the murder, while

searching the prison athletic yard for evidence regarding Owens’ murder, he found a

bucket containing an "inmate’s shirt and towel and stuff," all of which had been partially

burned. The shirt had the name "W. Brown" on it. Donald Conner, the laundry manager,

who is in charge of tracking inmate clothing, testified that Brown was missing a set of

testify as to the events surrounding the murder of Earl Owens. Franklin Kelly and

Brown, W. & Troy, L. 2

time of the murder. Noel White testified to hearing "odd sounds" coming from Owens’

cell at the time of the murder and to seeing two anonymous black males--not Brown or

Troy-- leave the cell with a bloody knife. White further testified that Wise and Smith

were not present at the time of the murder and could not have been witnesses to the

crime. The State impeached White’s testimony by demonstrating that White had

previously identified Brown and Troy as the men responsible for Owens’ murder.

Trial Summary:

10/14/82

06/l 6/83

06122183

07/l 9183

Indicted on one count of First-Degree Murder

Sentenced to death

Additional Information:

As a juvenile, Willie Brown had an extensive criminal record. As an adult and prior to

the Owens murder, Brown was sentenced to seven years imprisonment, with ninety-nine

days of community supervision, for a 1968 Robbery conviction, and was sentenced to

twenty years imprisonment, with ninety-nine days of community supervision for a 1976

Armed Robbery conviction. Brown was serving this sentence at the time of the Owens

murder.

Larry Troy, prior to the Owens murder, was sentenced to five years imprisonment for a

1968 Armed Robbery conviction and three years imprisonment for convictions stemming

from Armed Robbery, Burglary, and Possession of Stolen Property charges in 1972.

While serving a term of twenty-five years for a 1975 Second Degree Murder conviction

and a term of fifteen years, six months for Aggravated Battery and Possession of a

Weapon by a State Prisoner convictions in 1977, Troy was charged with the murder of

Owens.

Florida Supreme Court - Direct Appeal

FSC# 64,802; 64,803; 69,427

515 So.2d 211

01 I30184

1 l/12/87

Appeal filed

FSC vacated conviction and sentence and remanded for retrial

Case Information:

On 0 l/3 O/84, Brown and Troy filed a Direct Appeal with the Florida Supreme Court,

State. On 1 l/12/87, the FSC agreed with Brown and Troy’s allegation and vacated the

Brown, W. & Troy, L. 3

Law Enforcement/Prosecution Statements:

A request for a statement was made to Spencer Mann, Public Information Officer for the

Eighth Circuit, but no comment has been received to date.

Defense Statements:

A request for comment was made to Bill Salmon, who represented Brown at the original

trial, but no comment has been received to date.

Current Status:

After the Owens murder, Brown was sentenced for the following crimes committed on

04/02/99:

Burglary - Life imprisonment

Armed Robbery - Life imprisonment

Armed Robbery - Life imprisonment

Armed Robbery - Life imprisonment

Grand Theft Auto - 5 years imprisonment

Leaving a Crash with Injury - 5 years imprisonment

Leaving a Crash with Injury - 5 years imprisonment

Resisting a Law Enforcement Officer with Violence - 5 years imprisonment

Battery of a Law Enforcement Officer - 5 years imprisonment

Battery of a Law Enforcement Officer - 5 years imprisonment

Battery of a Law Enforcement Officer - 5 years imprisonment

After the Owens murder, Troy was sentenced to twelve years imprisonment, with nearly

two years community supervision, for a 1991 Unlawful Sale of Cocaine On or Near

School Property conviction. On 02/01/02, while on Conditional Release, Troy missed

curfew, thus violating the conditions of his parole, and was taken to a Miami county jail

for processing. While he was being searched, crack cocaine was discovered, and Troy

was arrested for Smuggling Contraband into a Detention Facility and Possession of

Cocaine. The charges were dismissed at trial, but Troy’s Conditional Release was

revoked and a new release date has yet to be set.

Alternate Prosecuted Suspect:

None

Report Date: 05/08/02 JFL

Approved: 05/08/02 WS

COX, Robert Craig (W/M)

DC# 113377

DOB: 1 O/06/59

Ninth Judicial Circuit, Orange County, Case # CR88-364

Sentencing Judge: The Honorable Richard F. Conrad

Trial Attorneys: Patricia Cashman & Kelly Sims, Assistant Public Defenders

Attorney, Direct Appeal: Larry B. Henderson, Assistant Public Defender

Date of Offense: 12/30/78

Date of Sentence 1 O/06/88

Circumstances of the Offense:

On 12/30/78, 19-year-old Sharon Zellers disappeared after leaving work at Walt Disney

World. On l/3/79, her abandoned car was discovered in an orange grove in Orange

County. The following day, her body was discovered fully submerged in a sewage lift

station located in close proximity to the orange grove. Ms. Zellers’ body was heavily

decomposed, and she was identified by her dental records. A medical examiner testified

that she died from blunt force trauma to the head and reported that she had received 14

separate head wounds. Despite Ms. Zellers’ injuries, the examiner reported that she

probably lived 20-30 minutes subsequent to the attack.

The law enforcement investigation led detectives to question Robert C. Cox. Cox and his

parents, who lived in California, were vacationing in Orlando. They were staying at a

Days Inn, which was located 340 feet from the sewage lift station where Ms. Zellers’

body was discovered. Cox’s mother had called the hotel security on 12/30/78, because

her son had returned to the motel and was bloody around the face and mouth. A portion

of his tongue had been severed off, and he was unable to talk and had to communicate by

writing. Cox then passed out and was transported to the emergency room by an

ambulance. Emergency surgery was performed on Cox to repair his damaged tongue.

Cox made a statement to officers on l/l 9/78, two weeks after the incident, and claimed

that he was injured during a fight at the local skating rink, Skate World. He stated that

there was a fight involving of eight people, four blacks and four whites, outside of the

skating rink. Cox claimed that after he was hit in the face, he bit his own tongue. He

claimed that he then got into his own car and left the scene. He claimed that he could not

find the hotel, so he went back to Skate World, where a Good Samaritan picked him up

Cox, R. 2

Detectives found three loose hairs in the victim’s car that were consistent with Cox’s

chest hair, and type-0 blood, which is the same type as Cox’s but not the victim’s.

A military-type boot print was discovered inside Ms. Zellers’ car. Cox was in the U.S.

Army at the time of his arrest and was wearing that type of boot when treated at the

hospital. A match, however, was never made linking the two prints together.

The State claimed that, although the evidence was circumstantial, it pointed to Cox as the

perpetrator. The State argued that Cox’s claim that he was in a fight at Skate World was

not credible and could not be corroborated by any of the security personnel who were

working that evening. There were no eyewitnesses who could support Cox’s alibi. On

appeal, the State argued that Cox’s statement that, after being injured, he left the rink in

his own car in search of his hotel was not true. Medical evidence was presented that an

artery in Cox’s tongue had been severed, and he was bleeding profusely from the mouth.

There was a trail of blood at the Days Inn leading from the second floor to the third floor.

There was, however, no blood discovered in Cox’s vehicle. Type-O blood, Cox’s blood

type, was discovered in Ms. Zellers’ car. The State acknowledged that 45 percent of the

population has type-0 blood; therefore, the discovery of this type of blood in the victim’s

car did not automatically prove that Cox was the murderer. It did, however, prove that

Ms. Zellers’ murderer was injured and lost blood in her car prior to her death.

A surgical assistant testified at trial that the injury to Cox’s tongue was more consistent

with someone other than himself biting off his tongue because of the shape of the wound

f-- and the ragged tear. The defense brought up the fact that the missing portion of Cox’s

tongue was not discovered in the victim’s mouth or near the victim. The State countered

that the victim’s body was severely decomposed as a result of being submerged in human

waste; therefore, the tongue may not have been able to be discovered.

Additional Information:

Cox was indicted in Florida nine years after the commission of the offense. At the time of

the indictment, Cox was serving a nine-year sentence in California for Kidnapping and

two separate counts of Assault with a Deadly Weapon. Circumstances of the offenses are

as follows;

In August of 1985, a young girl named Kathleen Boice arrived at her house in Crestview

California. As she exited her vehicle, Cox, who was following her, jumped from his car,

grabbed the victim, threw her to the ground, placed a seven-inch knife to her throat and

told her, " Go with me, don’t scream or I‘ll kill you." During this scuffle, the knife cut the

victim’s hand.

In December of 1985, a young woman, Gidget Wickam, was stationed with the U.S.

Army at Fort Ord, California. Ms. Wickam went to the airport to retrieve luggage and, as

Cox, R. 3

Trial Summary:

12/l 5187

01122188

02125188

09/30/88

1 O/06/8 8

Florida detainer lodged against defendant while incarcerated in California.

Arrest warrant issued.

Defendant indicted:

Count I: Murder in the First Degree

Upon advisory recommendation, the jury recommended death by a 7-5

majority.

Defendant sentenced as follows

Count I: Murder in the First Degree

Florida Supreme Court, Direct Appeal

FSC# 73,150

555 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 1989)

1 O/06/8 8

03/l O/89

06/08/99

07/l l/89

12121189

02/ 12190

02/23/90

Appeal filed

Initial brief filed.

State’s answer brief filed

Defendant’s reply brief filed.

FSC reversed conviction, vacated the sentence and directed that defendant

be acquitted of charge.

Rehearing denied.

Mandate issued.

Case Information:

On 03/10/89, the defendant filed his Direct Appeal initial brief, which included the

following claims of trial court error: the evidence was legally insufficient to support a

conviction; improper excusal of two prospective jurors; the State failed to try Cox for the

offense within 180 days and did not indict until nine years after the murder thereby

violating the defendant’s due process and preventing him from conducting a proper

investigation; and, that Cox’s due process was violated regarding other evidentiary

matters.

The Florida Supreme Court unanimously agreed that there was insufficient evidence to

support the verdict and commented that, although the State’s evidence would have

created a reasonable suspicion, the case was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The

Court stated the evidence did not prove that Cox, and only Cox, murdered the victim. The

Court then vacated Cox’s death sentence, reversed his conviction and remanded to the-

Cox, R. 4

Former Assistant State Attorney and current Circuit Court Judge Frederick J. Lauten

wrote:

Jeff Ashton and I prosecuted Robert Cox together. The case was ten

years old when I was sent to California by Robert Egan to speak to Cox

to see if he would plead to first-degree murder if we waived the death

penalty. He would not.

Blood stains found on a floor mat were sent to a new DNA lab to

determine if DNA was present. A preliminary report indicated that DNA

could be obtained so we took a sample of blood from Robert Cox. The

lab reported that the sample from the floor mat lacked even molecular

weight for the lab to report a match and maintain the standards

established for accuracy and reliability. The lab confirmed that the blood

type on the mats matched Cox’s blood type, which was evidence we

already had. Jeff and I reviewed the case thoroughly and felt that we had

enough circumstantial evidence to establish that Cox committed the

murder and indicted him.

Nineteen-year-old Sharon Zellers went to work at Walt Disney World on

December 30, 1978. She had a habit of informing her parents by

telephone of everywhere she went. She was unusually diligent about

calling her parents. At the end of her work shift, she called her parents to

tell them she was going to meet some friends for breakfast. She promised

to call when she left the restaurant; however, she never called. Her father

left home and began driving around town to look for her.

At the same time, Robert Cox appeared at a hotel where his parents were

staying, the Day’s Inn on Sandlake Road. He was bleeding profusely

from the mouth and a deputy sheriff was called to take a report.

Eventually, Cox was taken to surgery for the injury to his tongue. That

night, through his father, he gave a statement to the police, and he also

gave another statement directly to the police. He told them that he had

been at an ice-skating rink on Highway 50 near Kirkman, and as he was

leaving, had been sucker punched by a group of white and black young

men and had bitten his tongue off. Rather than return to the ice skating

rink to seek help from the police officer he had walked past seconds ago,

he reported that he got in his car and drove around looking for a hospital,

and unable to find one, returned to the parking lot of the Albertson’s

grocery store, right next to the skating rink. At that time, some good

Samaritan picked him up, bleeding like mad, and drove him the Sand

Lake Day’s Inn and simply dropped him in the parking lot and left him

there to find his parents room! The same night, his father accompanied a

Cox, R. 5

hotel. The deputy who took the report went with Cox’s father and looked

inside the car for evidence and discovered that not one single drop of

blood was present, even though Cox himself was bleeding like crazy

when he found him at the hotel.

Five days after her disappearance, Sharon Zellers’ body was found in a

sewage lift station. That station was no more than 300 yards from the

Day’s Inn. Her body was unrecognizable because it had been in water

and feces, which was pumped down a pipe to a raw sewage station,

located further east on Sand Lake Road. Her car was found 20 yards away

with blood in it, a boot print, and hair samples, all of which matched

Robert Cox. The back seat of the car was missing and to this day has

never been found.

As the case proceeded to trial, during discovery, a surgical nurse was

identified who assisted in the surgery to the injury to Cox’s tongue. She

had never been interviewed before, but when finally interviewed by Jeff

and me she testified that on the night of the surgery she and the surgeon

were told how Cox had injured his tongue (sucker punched at the ice-

skating rink) but that the shape of the injury to the tongue was

inconsistent with that type of injury and consistent with his having his

tongue bitten off by someone else. For example, while it was in their

mouth!

At trial, we presented the testimony of the detective who found the car in

the Albertson’s without any blood in it despite the statement from Cox

that he had driven around injured in the car; the testimony from the

surgeon, that profuse amounts of blood would have been lost by Cox until

he received surgery; the testimony of the nurse I just referred to;

testimony of blood experts that the blood in Sharon Zellers’ car matched

Cox’s blood type; testimony from a hair expert that the hair found in the

car was consistent with the characteristics of his hair; testimony from a

witness that the boot print found in the car was consistent with the kind of

sole worn by Army Ranger’s at that time (Cox was an army ranger).

The jury deliberated at length and found Cox guilty of murder in the first

degree. At the sentencing hearing, we flew in two women from California

who Cox had kidnapped at either knifepoint or gunpoint. They testified to

the terror of their kidnapping by Cox. The jury recommended death 7 to 5

and Judge Conrad imposed the death penalty.

The Florida Supreme Court held that the evidence in Cox’s case was

circumstantial and did not preclude every reasonable hypothesis of

innocence and entered a judgment of acquittal. Cox was returned to

Cox, R. 6

Eventually he was paroled and a few years later committed a series of

armed robberies in Texas where he was sentenced to life in prison.

Jeff Ashton, Assistant State Attorney wrote that he agreed with Judge Lauten’s recitation

of the case and added that Cox is presently serving a 35-year State and a consecutive 15-

year Federal sentence out of Texas.

Detective Dan Nazarchuk (retired) of the Orlando County Sheriffs Office was one of

the investigators on the Cox case. He stated that he believes very strongly that Robert

Cox committed this murder. He claimed there were never any other suspects and stated

that he feels the jury reached the correct verdict.

Defense Attorney Statements:

A request for comment and a copy of this report was sent to defense attorney, Patricia

Cashman. Ms. Cashman provided the following statement regarding Cox’s case, "This

case is one of two unanimous reversals in death penalty cases by the Florida Supreme

Court. A wrongful conviction occurred and the appellate court released Mr. Cox after he

spent 18 months on death row."

In 1995, Cox was arrested for holding a gun on a 12-year-old girl in Decatur, Texas. He

is presently serving a life sentence for that robbery and a consecutive 15-year federal

sentence.

GOLDEN, Andrew, (W/M)

DC# 365791

DOB: 06/14/44

Tenth Judicial Circuit, Polk County, Case # 90-l 778

Sentencing Judge: The Honorable Robert E. Pyle

Trial Attorney: Allen R. Smith Esq.

Attorney, Direct Appeal: Gwendolyn Spivey, Esq.

Date of Offense: 09/l 3189

Date of Sentence: 1 l/15/91

Circumstance of Offense:

On 9/13/89, at 3:30 a.m., a police officer found the body of Ardelle Golden floating in

Lake Hartridge, which is located in Winter Haven, Florida. Golden’s rented car was

submerged in the lake. On 4/5/90, her husband, Andrew Golden, was indicted for her

murder.

At trial, Andrew Golden testified that he and his wife had been at Lake Hartridge on the

evening of 09/12/89 and had returned home at approximately 1l:OO p.m. He claimed, that

upon returning home, his wife could not find her cigarette case and went out to go look

for it and to purchase more cigarettes. Mr. Golden claimed that he stayed home and went

to sleep. When Mr. Golden awoke the next morning, he asked his eldest son where his

mother was. His son did not know where his mother was and left the home shortly after

6:00 a.m. to look for her. He was, however, unable to find her and returned home and

then left again shortly thereafter to report to his school that he would be late. Golden

called the police to report that his wife was missing. Two detectives came to the Golden

home and, while they were there gathering information, they received a radio call

informing them that the drowning victim was identified as Andrew Golden’s wife. Mr.

Golden was subsequently arrested a month after his wife’s drowning for First-Degree

Murder.

The State presented evidence at trial that the cigarette case that Mr. Golden claimed his

wife "was going crazy looking for" was discovered floating in the lake near Mrs.

Golden’s body and an unopened package of cigarettes was found inside of her purse. The

State claimed that investigators went to every convenience store in close proximity to the

Golden home, and there were no clerks who could identify Mrs. Golden as being a

customer that evening. Mrs. Golden’s body was found floating in the lake without her

glasses, which were discovered inside of her purse. Mrs. Golden’s vision was 400/20, and

Golden, A. 2

able to see more than 10 inches away without her glasses; therefore, she would not have

been able to drive the car to the lake prior to driving the vehicle into the water.

The State introduced evidence that, although Golden initially denied that he had any

insurance, the family had more than $300,000 in life insurance policies. It was

determined that Golden forged his wife’s signature on life insurance applications, most of

which were purchased within the five months prior to Ardelle Golden’s death.

Additionally, the rented car discovered in the lake was rented by Mr. Golden, who used

his American Express card. American Express automatically provided $200,000.00 in

accidental death insurance. The State pointed out that the Goldens owned two cars;

therefore, renting an additional car would have been an unnecessary expense.

The State proved that Golden had not been gainfully employed for approximately two

years and was over $200,000.00 in debt. Golden filed for bankruptcy after his wife’s

death and never related to his bankruptcy attorney that he anticipated receiving an

insurance settlement. In closing arguments, the State argued that Golden drowned his

wife and drove the car into the lake. The State contended that Golden forged his wife’s

signature on several insurance applications and then murdered her to collect on the

policies.

Mr. Golden’s attorney argued that Golden was not aware of the existence of the policies

because they were offered by their credit card companies. The defense claimed that

Golden was contacted by the credit card companies after his wife’s death and that he did

not pursue them for payment.

The jury convicted Golden and recommended that he be sentenced to death. The trial

court agreed with the jury recommendation and sentenced Golden to death on 1 l/l 5191.

Trial Summary:

04/05/90

1 O/28/9 1

10128191

1 l/15/91

Defendant was indicted for one count of First-Degree Murder.

Defendant was found Guilty by the trial jury.

The jury, upon advisory recommendation, recommended death by an

8 to 4 majority.

Defendant sentenced:

Golden, A. 3

Florida Supreme Court, Direct Appeal

FSC# 78,982

629 So. 2d 109(Fla. 1993)

1 l/25/91

1 l/10/93

1 l/17/93

01/05/94

01/05/94

Appeal tiled

FSC vacated Golden’s conviction and sentence and directed that he be

released from custody.

Motion for rehearing tiled (State filed)

Rehearing denied

Mandate issued

Case History:

On 11125191, Golden filed a Direct Appeal in the Florida Supreme Court. The main issue,

on appeal, was that there was insufficient evidence to prove that his wife’s death resulted

from the criminal agency of another person.

The Supreme Court stated that ". . . the finger of suspicion points heavily at Golden. A

reasonable juror could conclude that he more than likely caused his wife’s death." The

Court concluded, however, that the State’s circumstantial evidence was insufficient to

prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Golden’s wife’s drowning was not an accident.

The Court subsequently vacated the conviction and sentence and ordered that Golden be

released.

Prosecution/ Law Enforcement Statements:

John Aguero, Director, Special Prosecution, State Attorney’s Office - Tenth Judicial

Circuit, wrote:

I received your memo and list of the "21 innocent" defendants convicted

and sentenced to death. I write only to comment on one, Andrew Golden.

This abominable opinion by the Florida Supreme Court was an insult to

the memory of Ardelle Golden and to the jurors and the judge who heard

the case. The Supreme Court just decided to be 13’h juror and disagree

with everyone else. They overturned this conviction and sentence saying

that "The finger of suspicion points heavily at Golden. A reasonable juror

could conclude that he more likely than not caused his wife’s death." They

also said "There were no wounds or other signs of violence on the body."

This last quote shows that they completely misapprehended the manner in

which Mr. Golden killed his wife. They paid absolutely no attention to the

FACTS. If they had, Mr. Golden would still be on death row where he

Golden, A. 4

would have to have been going over 35 miles per hour to get the car as far

out in the lake as it was found. According to the testimony of the medical

examiner and the accident reconstruction expert, either the woman should

have had seat belt injuries (she always wore a seat belt) or, in an

unexpected crash like the defense theorized, she would have hit the

windshield. Thus it was precisely the LACK OF INJURIES that helped

prove the case. Of course there was a multitude of other evidence, but this

complete lack of understanding in deciding a death penalty case is what

misleads people like those who think there were 21 innocent people on

death row. I got calls from three of the jurors after Mr. Golden was

released. Each asked me essentially, who the hell does the Supreme Court

think they are? They didn’t sit through this trial. I challenge anyone who

thinks Mr. Golden is innocent to sit down and talk to me. They won’t

think he’s innocent when they leave."

A request for comment was made to Deputy Chief Darrell Kirkland of the Winter Haven

Police Department. A response has not been received to date.

Defense Attorney Statements:

Gwendolyn Spivey, Golden’s attorney on Direct Appeal stated that any information

relative to this case may be found in her Direct Appeal initial brief. She stated, " The

Florida Supreme Court did an excellent job regarding this case."

Current Status:

Andrew Golden is presently serving a fifteen-year prison sentence in Texas for three

separate cases of Indecency with a Child.

GREEN, Joseph Nahume (B/M)

DC# 091882

DOB: 01/10/56

Eighth Judicial Circuit, Bradford County, Case # 92-633

Sentencing Judge: The Honorable Robert P. Cates

Trial Attorneys: Jeffrey Leukel and F. Reed Replogle, Esq.

Direct Appeal Attorney: David A. Davis, Assistant Public Defender

Date of Offense: 12108192

Date of Sentence: 1 l/30/93

Circumstances of Offense:

At 10: 10 p.m. on 12/08/92, Judy Miscally was using a public phone at the Mapco

convenience store in Starke, Florida, when she was approached by a man who demanded

money. When she refused and screamed, the man shot her and fled the scene. Miscally

) later died.

Three people witnessed the shooting - John Goolsby, Katrina Kintner and Lonnie

Thompson. Miscally described the shooter as a skinny, black man in his mid-twenties,

and described the gun as a small, semiautomatic pistol. Goolsby was in his car at a

stoplight near the Mapco store when he heard the shot, and he saw two people in front of

the store. Goolsby was not wearing his glasses at the time and could not determine the

sex or race of either person. Kintner was sitting in her car in a convenience store parking

lot across the street from the Mapco store when she heard the shot. Kintner said she saw

three black men surrounding a white woman but could not describe them in any detail.

Thompson was near the convenience store across the street from the Mapco store when

he heard the shot. Thompson said he saw Green and Miscally struggle and saw Green

shoot Miscally before fleeing behind the store.

Green’s alibi was that on the night of the murder, he and his girlfriend, Gwen Coleman,

were walking around Starke. During that night, Green helped Donald Laverly and David

Padgett take a muffler off of Laverly’s car in the parking lot of the Pizza Hut restaurant.

Green returned to the motel where he and Coleman were staying sometime after 1l:OO

Green, J. 2

Trial Summary:

01/15/93 Indicted on one count of First-Degree Murder

1 o/05/93 Jury returned a guilty verdict

1 O/25/93 Jury recommended a death sentence by a vote of 9-3

1 l/30/93 Sentenced to death

Retrial Summary

03/l 6/00 Acquitted at retrial

Additional Information:

Prior to his trial for the murder of Judy Miscally, Green had a criminal record in the State

of Florida. The following is his prior prison history in Florida:

FSC# 83,003

688 So.2d 301

01/10/94

1 l/27/96

Appeal filed

FSC vacated conviction and sentence and remanded for retrial

Case Information:

Green filed a Direct Appeal with the Florida Supreme Court on 01/l O/94, citing twelve

trial court errors. The FSC found two trial court errors harmful enough to warrant a new

trial and chose not to comment on the other ten issues. The FSC found that errors were

committed by allowing the State to cross-examine a defense witness about her prior

alcohol abuse and by admitting evidence seized pursuant to a bad search warrant.

Additionally, the FSC found that Lonnie Thompson’s trial testimony was often

inconsistent and contradictory. On 1 l/27/96, the FSC vacated the conviction and

sentence and ordered a new trial.

On 03/16/00, Green was acquitted of the charge of First-Degree Murder. The trial court

Green, J. 3

Law Enforcement/Prosecution Statements:

Curtis French, who was the Assistant Attorney General for the Direct Appeal to the

Florida Supreme Court, had the following statement regarding the Green case:

French noted that once the testimony of the State witness (Thompson) had been excluded

as unreliable, "the prosecution could not prove its case," thus Green was acquitted at

retrial.

According to French, Green had not been cleared of the crime, but instead, he "had been

given the benefit of the doubt" in the case due to the nature of the testimony and evidence

against him. French stated that the evidence pointed to Green because Green "certainly

had both the motive and opportunity to commit the crime," and, additionally, problems

existed with his alibi that was given to police,

To French, Green had not been cleared of the crime and French "would tend to dispute

his innocence."

Additional comments were received from William Cervone, State Attorney for the Eighth

Circuit:

As to Joseph Green, I can provide my comments since I tried the case. In essence,

the ultimate acquittal was because the trial court suppressed the identification

testimony of witness Lonnie Thompson after the original remand from the Florida

Supreme Court. Thompson was the only eyewitness linking Green to the murder

and when his testimony was disallowed the remaining circumstances were

insufficient to secure a conviction.

Interestingly, the same judge who ultimately suppressed the identification after the

remand had conducted extensive hearings before the first trial as to the competency

of Thompson and had allowed him to testify, While the Supreme Court Opinion

questioned Thompson’s competency as a witness, it did not rule on that or find the

original admission of his testimony to be error. It being my belief that the trial court

had improperly invaded the province of the jury in ruling on the credibility that

should be given to a witness’ testimony, the suppression of the identification was

appealed but that appeal was not successful. Additionally, even before the first trial

the trial court had suppressed evidence showing the presence of gun powder residue

in the pockets of the defendant’s clothing, and the Supreme Court Opinion

suppressed the seizure of the clothing itself. I remain convinced of Green’s guilt, as

was the jury that originally heard the testimony of Thompson, evaluated it, and

Green, J. 4

Defense Statements:

David Davis, who was Green’s defense counsel for the Direct Appeal to the Florida

Supreme Court, had the following statement regarding the Green case:

Davis cited competency issues of the State’s witness, Thompson, as the primary reason

for the acquittal of Green at the retrial. According to Davis, "the case died when

Thompson was declared incompetent to testify."

Davis commented that, due to the exclusion of Thompson’s testimony and the lack of

other compelling evidence that Green committed the crime, Green had a "strong claim of

innocence," probably "the strongest claim of innocence that I have seen in a long time."

Davis attributes the suspicion and prosecution of Green to "community uproar" and a

small town trying to get revenge for the murder of a popular citizen.

According to Davis, Green was acquitted due to bad police practices, most notably the

bad search warrant and use of Thompson as a witness, and the overall weakness of the

case against him.

Current Status:

After acquittal, Green was sentenced in 2001 to one-year terms for two cocaine

possession charges that occurred in 2000. He was released from prison on 1 l/05/01.

There is no information available as to Green’s criminal history subsequent to his release.

Alternate Prosecuted Suspect:

None

Report Date: 05/l 4/02 JFL

Approved: 05/l 7102 WS

HAYES, Robert (B/M)

DC # 710372

DOB: 120 2/63

Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County, Case # 90-3993-CF 10

Sentencing Judge: The Honorable Stanton S. Kaplan

Attorney, Criminal Trial: Barbara Ann Heyer - Special Public Defender

Attorney, Direct Appeal: Richard B. Greene - Assistant Public Defender

Attorney, Retrial: Barbara Ann Heyer - Special Public Defender

Date of Offense: 02/20/90

Date of Sentence: 06/05/92

Circumstances of Offense:

Robert Hayes was convicted and sentenced to death for the strangulation of Pamela

Albertson, a co-worker at the Pompano Harness Track.

When Pamela Albertson did not show up for work on the morning of 02/20/90, the

security officials of the Pompano Harness Track went to her dormitory room in search of

her. When security officials arrived at the dormitory where Albertson and the other

female grooms’ lived, they found her strangled body lying on the floor in blue jeans and a

T-shirt.

Investigation into the murder quickly led to the questioning and, eventually, the arrest of

Robert Hayes. Witness testimony and DNA evidence placed Hayes at the murder scene;

however, there was also evidence that someone else could have possibly perpetrated the

crime. Pamela Albertson was found with several strands of Caucasian hair clutched in

her hand. The hairs were inconsistent with Hayes’ hair, as he was African-American.

At trial, the State intended to prove Hayes’ guilt through DNA evidence, witness

testimony, testimony of a jailhouse informant and evidence of a strikingly similar

collateral attack. Further examination of the DNA evidence revealed semen on a tank top

and in the vagina of Pamela Albertson. Tests confirmed a three-band match on the tank

top and a seven-band match on the vaginal swab for compatibility with Hayes.

Additionally, employees of the Pompano Harness Track stated that they saw a man fitting

Hayes’ description at Albertson’s dormitory on the night of her murder. Several people

testified that Albertson had expressed fear of being alone with the defendant, although no

complaint against Hayes in 1988, stating he pinned her on the floor and began choking

her. When Hayes let Lesko go, she promptly called police and Hayes was arrested for

simple assault. Those charges were later dropped. Finally, Ronald Morrison, Hayes’

cellmate in Broward County Jail, testified that Hayes, in essence, confessed to being in

Albertson’s room that night, choking her, and fleeing through the window. The State

relied on such evidence to obtain a conviction of First-Degree Murder on 1 O/29/91.

Additional Information:

On 06/26/89, prior to his murder conviction, Hayes was arrested on charges of robbery

and burglary in Wilmington, Delaware. The victim, Lillian Shephard, reported that

Hayes had sexually harassed her on many occasions and on the date of the referenced

offense, Hayes broke into her apartment and choked her until she lost consciousness. She

awoke to see Hayes leaving her apartment. Hayes pled guilty to these charges and

received two years probation.

Trial Summary:

03/22/90

1 O/29/9 1

1 l/14/91

06/05/92

06/02/95

07/ 16197

Defendant indicted on:

Count I: First-Degree Murder

The jury found the defendant guilty of First-Degree Murder, as charged in

the indictment.

Upon advisory sentencing, the jury, by a 10 to 2 majority, voted for the

death penalty.

The defendant was sentenced as followed:

Count I: First-Degree Murder - Death

FSC vacated Hayes’ death sentence and remanded for a retrial.

Robert Hayes was acquitted of the murder of Pamela Albertson.

Florida Supreme Court, Direct Appeal

FSC # 79,997

660 So. 2d 257 (Fla. 1995)

06/l l/92

06/02/95

09/ 13195

10/13/95

Appeal filed.

FSC reversed the conviction, vacated the death sentence and remanded for

a new trial.

Rehearing denied.

Hayes, R. 3

Case Information:

On 06/l l/92, Hayes filed a Direct Appeal in the Florida Supreme Court. In this appeal,

he argued that the DNA results were fallacious due to the unreliable means by which they

were tested. Holding DNA testing, or any new scientific principle, up to the highest

standards of credibility, the Florida Supreme Court insisted that the evidence or expert

testimony in question must assist the jury in determining the fact in an issue, must pass

the dictates of the Frye test established in Frye v. United State.s2, and must be presented

by a qualified expert on the subject. In examining the issues of the Hayes’ case, the

unreliable technique of "band-shifting" was used to explain the DNA test results in terms

of the probability that Hayes left the semen found on the tank top. The Florida Supreme

Court ruled that the "band-shifting" method employed in the Hayes case was

inadmissible as a matter of law, and, as such, the tank top was erroneously admitted as

evidence. The high court did, however, rule that the semen found in Albertson’s vagina

was properly tested and could be presented as credible evidence in Hayes’ retrial.

Hayes also raised the issue of collateral crime evidence in his appeal. The prosecution

presented evidence that Hayes attacked another female co-worker at a track in New

Jersey. The prosecution sought to show the similarities between that attack and the

murder of Pamela Albertson; however, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that there were

"insufficient points of similarity to the instant offense to warrant admitting evidence of

, the previous attack. " As such, the high court deemed the admittance of collateral crime

evidence as error.

In addition, Hayes objected at trial and argued on appeal the admittance of hearsay

evidence regarding the victim’s supposed fear of him. The Florida Supreme Court

agreed, and found that the trial court erred in allowing the hearsay testimony.

The fourth matter brought up in appeal was the prosecution’s elicitation of testimony

concerning the defense’s failure to request various tests of evidence. The Florida

Supreme Court found error as allowing such testimony insinuated that the burden of

proof lied with the defense.

For the expressed reasons, the Florida Supreme Court reversed Hayes’ conviction,

vacated his death sentence and remanded for retrial.

Upon retrial, the jury acquitted Hayes of the murder of Pamela Albertson.

Law Enforcement/ Prosecution Statements:

A letter requesting comment was sent to the Broward County Sheriffs Department on

2 Frye v. United States - Supreme Court case that established the guidelines for considering novel scientific

r‘- techniques or methods in verifying evidence or testimony. The Frye test asks whether expert testimony is

based on a scientific principle that is "sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the

Hayes, R. 4

Carolyn V. McCann of the State Attorney’s Office for the Seventeenth Circuit issued the

following statement concerning Hayes’ case:

The [Florida Supreme Court] ruled that as a matter of first impression that the

"band-shifting" technique of DNA testing would be inadmissible as a matter of

law regarding Hayes’ DNA found on the victim’s shirt. The Court did not make

the same ruling as to Hayes’ DNA found in the victim’s vagina. On retz, the

State presented evidence of Hayes’ DNA found in the victim’s vagina. However,

the defense challenged this evidence with other evidence that hairs inconsistent

with Hayes’ were found clutched in the victim’s hand and expert DNA testimony

that many thought was questionable. In the end, the jury disregarded the fact that

Hayes’ DNA was found in the victim’s vagina and acquitted him of murder.

Defense Statements:

Defense Attorney Barbara Ann Heyer commented:

The Florida Supreme Court’s decision in the Hayes Case was beneficial in a

number of ways. First, it clarified the use of DNA evidence and second, it

clarified questions surrounding the Williams rule. I believe the court made the

right decision in finding Hayes not guilty because he was innocent.

Current Status:

According to NCIC, Robert Hayes has had no arrests subsequent to his release.

03/07/02 - ew

03/l l/O2 - approved - ws

JACOBS, Sonia, (W/F)

DC# 149957

DOB: 08/24/47

Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County, Case # 76-1275CFB

Sentencing Judge: The Honorable M. Daniel Futch

Attorney, Direct Appeal: Ray Sandstrom, Private

Attorney, Collateral Appeals: Richard Strafer, Private

Date of Offense: 02/20/76

Date of Sentence: 08/20/76

Date of Resentence 05/05/8 1

Circumstance of Offense:

Sonia Jacobs was convicted of the murders of Florida Trooper Philip Black and off-duty

Canadian Constable Donald Irwin, and the kidnapping of Leonard Levison.

According to the Florida Supreme Court opinion the circumstances of the offense are as

followed: On February 20, 1976, Trooper Black, and his friend Donald Irwin, a

Canadian Constable on vacation, were on a routine patrol early in the morning. Black

drove into a rest area along Interstate 95 and observed a Camero automobile in which

Walter Rhodes and Jessie Tafero, Jacobs and her two children were sleeping. Trooper

Black pulled beside the vehicle and approached the car to ask for identification. He saw a

gun at Rhodes feet and confiscated the weapon. He returned to his patrol car to run a

radio check on Rhodes and his gun. Black learned, from the radio check, that Rhodes was

a convicted felon and returned to the car to question the other occupants. Trooper Black

noticed a gun holster in the back seat and ordered everyone out of the vehicle. Tafero,

sitting in the front passenger seat, was slow exiting the vehicle, so Black pulled Tafero

out. The two struggled until Black, with Irwin’s assistance, subdued Tafero.

Rhodes testified that while Irwin held Tafero against the patrol car, Black backed away

and drew his firearm. Rhodes walked to the front of the car with his hands in the air.

Rhodes claimed he then heard two or three shots, and he turned and saw Jacobs, still in

the car, holding a nine-millimeter gun with both hands. Tafero escaped from Irwin’s

Jacobs, S. 2

Rhodes alleged that Tafero then took the trooper’s gun and some shell casings. The group

then fled in the patrol car. With Rhodes driving, they exited Interstate 95 and entered an

apartment complex parking lot where they observed Leonard Levison emerging from his

Cadillac. Rhodes demanded, at gunpoint, that Levinson surrender his keys. Tafero told

Levison that they had a sick child that they needed to take to the hospital. Jacobs nodded

her head in agreement. Tafero grabbed Levinson, and all parties entered the Cadillac.

Rhodes drove the group until they were finally captured when he crashed while

attempting to evade a roadblock.

Shortly after the crash, a trooper, thinking Jacobs was a hostage, led her away from the

scene where Rhodes and Tafero lay handcuffed on the ground. As they passed, Jacobs

bent down and appeared to kiss Tafero. Jacobs then acknowledged that she was "with

them". The trooper then asked Jacobs, "Do you like shooting troopers?" Jacobs

responded, "We had to."

Tafero later testified, on Jacob’s behalf, that while he and Trooper Black were struggling,

Rhodes shot and killed both men.

Prior Record:

Arrest Date Location

1 l/01/68 Miami Dade

12/19/70 Miami Dade

Charge Disposition

Prostitution Dismissed

I- Poss. of Marijuana Counts I and III, 5

II- Contr. to the years probation.

Delinquency of a

Minor Count II- Dismissed

III- Poss. of

Amphetamines

1 l/28/71

07/02/74

Miami Dade

Myrtle Beach, SC,

Forgery Not Guilty

I- Poss. of Marijuana Unknown

II- Poss. Of Hashish

III, IV- Poss. with

Intent to Dist.

Amphet.

/Barbituates.

V- Pass. of LSD

VI- Violation of SC

Jacobs, S. 3

Codefendant Information:

Walter Norman Rhodes pled guilty and was sentenced to Life for his cooperation in the

case. He was paroled in 1994 and his supervision was transferred to New Mexico. He is

presently listed as an absconder from supervision.

Jessie Tafero was tried and convicted and subsequently executed on 05/04/90 for the

murders of Black and Irwin.

archived in federal court and is not available for review.

03103176

0510518 1

1 O/09/92

Indicted for two counts of First-Degree Murder, Theft of a Firearm,

Grand Theft Auto, Theft of a Firearm, Kidnapping.

The Jury recommended Life, however, the defendant was sentenced as

follows:

Count I: First-Degree Murder- Death

Count II: First-Degree Murder- Death

Count III: Kidnapping- Life

On remand from the Florida Supreme Court, Jacobs received two Life

sentences for the murder charges to run concurrently with the Life

sentence received from the kidnapping.

Jacobs entered a plea to Second-Degree Murder and was released with

credit time served.

Florida Supreme Court, Direct Appeal

FSC# 50,175

396 So. 2d 713 (1981)

0312618 1 FSC affirmed the murder convictions and the kidnapping conviction and

Jacobs, S. 4

r- Case History:

After a Direct Appeal was tiled in the Florida Supreme Court, Jacobs filed an application

for stay and for leave to file a motion for a new trial alleging that there was newly

discovered evidence as it related to her codefendant, Walter Rhodes. Jacobs claimed he

stated on more than one occasion that it was he who fired the shots that killed the two

officers. The State argued that information pertaining to this allegation was available to

Jacobs during the trial. The Florida Supreme Court issued an order directing the trial

judge to tile a response indicating whether he imposed the death sentence in

consideration of any information not known to Jacobs. In filing the response, the judge

attached a copy of Jacobs’ presentence investigation claiming that he had no knowledge

as to whether defense counsel had access to the report. Jacobs then filed a supplement to

her motion claiming that a Brady’ violation occurred during trial. Attached to the

presentence investigation was a confidential polygraph examination of Walter Rhodes.

Jacobs argued that the polygraph report indicated Rhodes’ responses were different than

those he made at trial. The State acknowledged in a response that, although the defense

was not supplied with this report, there was no contradiction between Rhodes’ testimony,

nor did Rhodes make any statements favorable to the defense. The Florida Supreme

Court considered the information and temporarily relinquished jurisdiction to the trial

court with directions to the trial judge to make a finding as to whether the appellant had

access to the presentence investigation during sentencing and whether withholding this

report constituted a Brady violation and order a new hearing.

The trial court made the determination that a Brady violation did not occur, and the

Supreme Court received the appeal back from the trial court. The Supreme Court agreed

that Rhodes’ polygraph statements were not inconsistent with other statements that he

had made.

Jacobs’ additional arguments included Miranda violations, improper denial of preemptory

challenges and her belief that she was unable to properly participate in her own defense.

The Supreme Court did not find error in those arguments, however, vacated Jacobs’

sentence of death based on the fact that the trial judge mistakenly believed that he could

not consider nonstatutory mitigating circumstances and held that the evidence was not

sufficient to override the jury’s sentence of death. The case was subsequently remanded

to the trial court for resentencing. The court upheld her life sentence on the kidnapping

case and claimed there was sufficient evidence to sustain her conviction. The Florida

Supreme Court opined, "One who participates with another in a common criminal

scheme is guilty of all crimes committed in the furtherance of that scheme regardless of

whether he or she physically participates in that crime."

On 0510518 1 Jacobs received two Life sentences for the murder charges to run

concurrently to the Life sentence she received on the Kidnapping case.

Jacobs, S. 5

Although Jacobs was no longer on death row, her attorneys continued to appeal her case

and filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus with the United States District Court on

1 l/25/85. The magistrate recommended that the petition be denied and, while the report

was under consideration, Jacobs’ attorneys discovered that Brenda Isham, Jacobs’

previous cellmate, had perjured herself at trial. The District Court granted Jacobs a stay

of the proceedings to allow her to pursue the issue in the state courts. Jacobs exhausted

her claim regarding Isham in state court and then filed an amended Habeas Petition in the

United States District Court. After Isham testified, the magistrate judge acknowledged

that Isham did perjure herself, but ruled that Isham’s testimony was not central to the

State’s case and denied the petition. Jacobs then filed a Habeas Appeal with the United

States Court of Appeals. The court found that a Brady violation.had occurred by using the

polygraph of Walter Rhodes and held that three of five statements that Jacobs made

violated her Miranda rights. The court affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded

the case to the District Court with instructions to grant the Habeas Petition conditioned on

the State granting Jacobs a new trial.

The State declined to try Jacobs again and allowed her to plead guilty to Second-Degree

Murder and released her with credit time served.

Law Enforcement/ Prosecution Statements:

’ Carolyn McCann, Assistant State Attorney, Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, wrote

I hope that the information contained in this letter will help set the

record straight regarding Jacobs’ involvement in the murders of Trooper

Black and Constable Irwin. . . . Sonia Jacobs was convicted after a

trial of two counts of first degree murder and one count kidnapping.

She was sentenced to death for the homicides and life for the

kidnapping. On review, the Supreme Court of Florida reversed

Jacobs’ sentence of death but upheld her convictions. Jacobs v.

State, 396 So. 2d 7 13(Fla. 198 1). Jacobs was thereafter re-sentenced

to two concurrent life sentences on the murder counts to be served

with the third concurrent life sentence on the kidnapping count.

Jacobs’ convictions had been upheld by all of the State and Federal

Courts reviewing the same until the Eleventh Circuit Court of

Appeals granted her petition for writ of habeas corpus in 1992. In

doing so, they specifically rejected Jacobs’ claim that the State

should have turned over to the defense a polygraph examiner’s

report. It is worth noting that the polygraph examiner’s report was

written the day following the examination from notes taken during

the interview and was not a "substantially verbatim" recording of

the witness’s, Walter Rhodes’s answers. It was for this reason that

the Supreme Court of Florida expressly and explicitly previously

Jacobs, S. 6

difference of opinions between the appellate courts that reviewed

Jacobs’ conviction formed part of the basis for habeas corpus relief.

The Eleventh Circuit also addressed the statements that Jacobs

made to police that were used against her at trial. Some of the

statements made by Sonia Jacobs were ruled inadmissible by the

Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. That Court’s opinion was that

Jacob’s rights were violated in that she was not properly advised of

her constitutional rights. The Court did not rule inadmissible her

statement that she was "with them" referring to Rhodes and Tafero

or her statement that she fired the first shot from the car. However,

the Court ruled inadmissible her statement after being asked "Do

you like shooting troopers’ that "we had to". The Court also ruled

inadmissible Jacobs’ statements that she told police her name was

‘Sandy Jenkins’ and that she was picked up by two detectives in an

FHP trooper vehicle while hitchhiking and her subsequent statement

changing her story to being picked up by two men in an orange

Cadillac. Likewise, Jacobs’ statement that she had gotten a ride to

Florida with ‘Tone" and another guy, and that there were guns in the

car and that two of them were hers and that there were six people in

the car when it pulled into the rest stop on I 95, including Jacobs,

her two children, the two men and a woman named "Frenchie" were

also ruled inadmissible by the Eleventh Circuit. Jacobs statement

that she didn’t know ‘Frenchie "and that "Frenchie" took off after

the shooting were also ruled inadmissible by the Eleventh Circuit.

Her statement that she had owned and fired two handguns was also

ruled inadmissible. The loss of these statements Jacobs made to

police was very damaging to the State’s case against her.

After the Eleventh Circuit reversed the convictions and sentences,

Jacobs pleaded guilty in October 1992 to two (2) counts of second

degree murder, and one count of kidnapping, and waived her rights

to appeal in exchange for a sentence of time served, which at that

point, amounted to sixteen (16) years and two hundred, thirty-three

(233) days incarceration. It is important for you to know that as part

of her plea agreement, Sonia Jacobs agreed, in court, to the factual

basis for her plea which included such facts that at the time of the

murders Jacobs was seated with her children in the back seat of the

Camaro, Tafero and Rhodes were outside of the car, that the first

shots were fired from the back of the Camaro and Rhodes testified

that he saw Jacobs holding a 9mm with both hands. Pierce Hyman, a

truck driver who was at the scene of the murder, also testified that it

sounded like the first shot came from the Camaro. Another truck

driver, Robert McKenzie, was also present at the time of the murder

and testified that Rhodes had his hands raised at the time of the

Jacobs, S. 7

a Taser weapon, which had been fired, were found behind the

driver’s seat of the Camaro where Jacobs was sitting. Receipts in the

car’s trunk showed that Jacobs had purchased two Smith & Wesson

automatic pistols. Another weapon she purchased, a .22 caliber

pistol, was also found at the scene. Evidence implicating Jacobs was

abundant and she stipulated that the State could prove all of it. In

addition, Jacobs made incriminating statements to police. . . . The

facts that I have written in this letter are just a small sampling of the

evidence against Jacobs. Of course, there was no prosecutorial

misconduct in this case, just a difference of opinion by the courts

which reviewed it, as to what constituted Brady evidence and the

admissibility of Jacobs’ many statements to police. Just as obvious

is that the facts that Jacobs agreed to as a factual basis for her plea

are far different from the facts portrayed by her and death penalty

opponents.

Defense Attorney Statements:

Defense attorney Ray Sandtrom is deceased.

Defense attorney Richard Strafer was contacted and will be providing a written

statement.

Current Status:

Sonia Jacobs is presently living in Ireland and according to NCIC has not had any arrests

subsequent to her release.

JARAMILLO, Anibal (H/M)

AKA: Jose Bernard0 Pineda

DC # 077098

DOB: 02/03/58

Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Dade County, Case # 80-24540

Sentencing Judge: The Honorable Ellen Morphonios

Attorney, Criminal Trial: Terrance McWilliams, Esq.

Attorney, Direct Appeal: Louis Casuso, Esq. & Edward McHale, Esq.

Date of Offense: 1 l/30/80

Date of Sentence: 04/08/8 1

Circumstances of Offense:

Anibal Jaramillo was convicted and sentenced to death for the murders of Gilbert0

Caicedo Reyes and Candelaria Castellanos Marin.

"..

In the early morning hours of 12/02/80, the bodies of Gilbert0 Caicedo Reyes and

Candeiaria Castellanos Marin were discovered in a home in South Dade County. Both

had been bound, gagged, and killed execution style with three shots to the head. Medical

examiners estimated the murders took place between 2:00 a.m. on November 30th and

2:00 a.m. on December 1". All six of the shots were believed to have been from the same

gun, probably a MAC- 10 submachine gun with a silencer.

Marin’s hands had been bound by handcuffs, upon which, medical examiners identified

fingerprints that did not belong to Jaramillo. A coil of hemp cord was found next to

Reyes’ body. It was apparent that a portion of the cord had been severed by a knife and

used to bind his hands behind his back. Packaging for a knife was found next to Reyes’

body and the knife itself was found on the dining room table, both of which bore

Jaramillo’s prints. The house had been ransacked in an apparent search for valuables;

however, among the numerous latent fingerprints that police discovered, none of them

belonged to Jaramillo.

. ..----.

At trial, Jaramillo testified that he had gone over to the Reyes’ residence on November

29*h to help Edison Caicedo, Reyes’ nephew, clean out the garage. Jaramillo wanted to

break down several boxes in order to make them more stackable, so he asked Caicedo for

a knife. Caicedo directed Jaramillo to a bag on the dining room table that contained a.

new knife. Jaramillo stated that he unwrapped the knife, leaving the wrapper on the

Jaramillo, A. 2

Jaramillo reported that he left the Reyes’ residence at approximately 10:00 p.m. that

night.

A neighbor testified that he heard a series of loud noises, which sounded like fighting,

come from the house around 7:00 p.m. on November 30th. Mr. Breslaw, who lived next

door, reported that he heard what sounded like furniture being pushed around, a scream,

and what could have been a gunshot. When police arrived on the scene during the early

morning hours of 12/02/80, they met Caicedo, who was accompanied by two attorneys.

Since he lived with his uncle Gilbert0 Caicedo Reyes, Edison Caicedo’s fingerprints were

found all over the house, including the ransacked areas. Caicedo did not testify at

Jaramillo’s trial, as his whereabouts were unknown at the time.

Jaramillo was convicted of two counts of First-Degree Murder and sentenced to death.

Additional Information:

Jaramillo was arrested on 12/14/80 for allegedly stealing and attempting to use another’s

passport. On 04/14/81, Jaramillo pled guilty as charged and was sentenced to 2.5 years

imprisonment to run concurrent with his death sentences (CC # 80-24540).

Jaramillo was again arrested on 03/13/83 for illegal possession of a firearm and for

receiving ransom money from a kidnapping. He was convicted and sentenced to four

years and two years imprisonment respectively.

Trial Summary:

12/16/80

01/07/81

04/08/8 1

04/08/8 1

04/08/8 1

07/08/82

The defendant was arrested.

Defendant indicted on the following:

Count I: First-Degree Murder

Count II: First-Degree Murder

Count III: Use of a Firearm in the Commission of a Felony

The jury found Jaramillo guilty of two counts of First-Degree Murder, as

charged in the indictment. He was acquitted on Count III: Use of a

Firearm in the Commission of a Felony.

Upon advisory sentencing, a majority of the jury voted that Jaramillo be

sentenced to life imprisonment.

The defendant was sentenced as followed:

Count I: First-Degree Murder - Death

Count II: First-Degree Murder - Death

The Florida Supreme Court reversed the convictions and remanded to the

Jaramillo, A. 3

Florida Supreme Court, Direct Appeal

FSC # 60,570

417 So. 2d 257 (Fla. 1982)

05/04/8 1

07108182

Appeal filed.

FSC reversed the convictions and remanded to the trial court with

instructions to discharge Jaramillo.

Case Information:

On 05/04/8 1, Jaramillo filed a Direct Appeal in the Florida Supreme Court. In that

appeal, he argued that the State’s case was based entirely on circumstantial evidence, and

that such evidence was insufficient to support his convictions of First-Degree Murder.

Applying the standard set forth in McArthur v. Nourse, the high court noted, "where the

only proof of guilt is circumstantial, no matter how strong the evidence may suggest

guilt, a conviction cannot be sustained unless the evidence is inconsistent with any

reasonable hypothesis of innocence." The only evidence offered by the State to show

Jaramillo’s guilt was the presence of his fingerprints on several items at the murder

scene. Jaramillo, however, had a reasonable explanation as to how his fingerprints got on

the knife and the wrapper in question. Since forensic experts could not determine that the

fingerprints were left at the time of the murder and not some time before, the State’s

evidence was not inconsistent with Jaramillo’s reasonable hypothesis of innocence. As -

such, the Florida Supreme Court reversed the convictions and remanded to the trial court

with instructions to discharge Jaramillo.

Law Enforcement/ Prosecution Statements:

Al Singleton of the Dade County Sheriffs Office provided the following comment on the

Jaramillo case:

Through several informants, it was learned that Jaramillo was an ‘enforcer’

(hit man) from Colombia. He was implicated in two separate homicides in 1980,

the first of which involved the shooting death of a woman in November 1980.

Although he was charged with this murder, he was never convicted. The second

murder involved the execution style killing of a couple in South Dade County.

Jaramillo’s fingerprints were found inside the house on the packaging of

rope/cord. That cord was used to bind the victims’ hands behind their backs.

Jaramillo was found guilty of the murders, but the Florida Supreme Court ruled

that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions and ordered an

acquittal. It is the opinion of the Dade County Sheriffs Office that Anibal

Jaramillo, A. 4

The State Attorneys Office for the Eleventh Circuit provided the following statement

regarding Jaramillo’s case:

It is an old case and the original prosecutors are not with the office any longer, but

[our] understanding is that Jaramillo, although the evidence was deemed to be

sufficient by a jury and a judge to convict him of two counts of first-degree

murder (and to sentence him to death), the FSC thought that his fingerprints found

on a knife near the victim’s bodies and on a grocery bag in the house were

insufficient, as the defendant gave a story that despite the State’s attempt to rebut

it, was deemed insufficient to refute it. See 417 So. 2d 257 (Fla. 1982). Although

the victims had been shot, one of the victims had their hands tied behind their

back with a cord. The coil of the cord was found next to the packaging of a knife

(the one in which the defendant’s fingerprints were on). The State had also

prosecuted a codefendant, Jaime Savino, whose fingerprints were found on the

handcuffs used to bind one of the victims. The trial court directed a verdict

against the State saying that was insufficient. It is our Office’s position that two

men (one being Jaramillo) got away with a double homicide.

Defense Statements:

Louis Casuso, Jaramillo’s defense attorney, commented:

1

/I-.

I thought the Court made the correct decision. The only evidence against

Jaramillo was that his fingerprints were found at the scene; however, there was a

reasonable explanation as to why they were there.

Current Status:

Anibal Jaramillo was deported to Colombia subsequent to his release and was murdered

there.

03/07/02 - ew

03/l 2102 - approved - ws

JENT, William (W/M)

DC# 071840

MILLER, Ernest (W/M)

DC# 071841

DOB: 06/19/56

Sixth Judicial Circuit, Pasco County, Case # 79-847

Sentencing Judge: The Honorable Wayne L. Cobb

Trial Attorneys: Leonard Holton, Esq. & Larry Hersch, Esq.

Attorneys, Direct Appeal: Leonard Holton, Esq., David Davis, Assistant Public Defender

& Larry Hersch, Esq.

Attorneys, Collateral Appeals: Eleanor Jackson Piel, Esq. & Howardene Garrett, Esq.

Date of Offense: 07/l 3179

Date of Sentence: 01/30/80

Circumstances of Offense:

>-

The following statement of the facts of the case was agreed upon by defense and State

counsel:

On the evening of 07/l 2 - 07/l 3/79, William Jent, Samantha Carver, and "Ricky" were

drinking at a railroad trestle on the Lacoochee River, where they were joined by Ernie

Miller, Glenna Frye, John Mortolla, Patricia Tirikaine, and C.J. Hubbard. Sometime

during the party, a woman identified as "Tammy," later identified as Gail Bradshaw,

began fighting with Carver. Hubbard saw Jent and Miller hitting Bradshaw, and Frye

noted that Jent pulled Carver off of Bradshaw, began beating her, and was joined by

Miller, who also began to beat Bradshaw. Miller told Frye to hand him a stick, which

Miller also used to beat Bradshaw. Miller and Jent carried the unconscious Bradshaw to

Miller’s car, placed her in the trunk, and everyone went to Miller’s house.

When the group arrived, Bradshaw was taken out of the trunk, laid on the trunk lid, and

raped by four men, including Jent and Miller, while Frye, Tirikaine, and Hubbard

watched. Bradshaw was placed back in the trunk, and the group left, except for Ricky,

who had passed out at Miller’s house. The group headed to Richloam Game Preserve,

where Bradshaw was taken out of the trunk and laid down on the ground in front of the

car. Bradshaw awoke, but was knocked to the ground by Jent. Miller poured gasoline on

Bradshaw and set her on fire, causing her death.

:-

The State called Hubbard, Tirikaine, and Frye to testify as to the events of that evening,

and their testimony is included in the statement of the facts of the case. The defense

counsel argued that the ability of the State’s witnesses to accurately testify as to the

Jent, W. & Miller, E. 2

consumed during the course of the evening. In addition to the drug impairment, the

defense also argued that the State’s witnesses gave conflicting and inconsistent reports

about the details of the murder, and therefore, the testimony of these witnesses could not

be trusted. The State claimed that the inconsistency in the reports was due to the threats

made by Jent and Miller to the State witnesses.

In addition to witness testimony, the State called forensic experts to testify about a single

hair fragment that was found on a stump where Bradshaw’s burned body was found. The

hair was not Bradshaw’s and was found to be microscopically similar to Jent’s. The

defense countered by stating that the hair analysis was inconclusive due to the fact that

the hair fragment was found four days after the murder and only after numerous

investigative personnel, including police and forensic, had been through the crime scene.

Trial Summary:

08129179 Jent and Miller indicted on one count each of First-Degree Murder

10/l l/79 State filed a Motion to Sever that was granted by the trial court

1 l/l 5/79

1 l/16/79

01/30/80

Jury returned guilty verdict against Miller

By a majority vote, jury recommended a life sentence for Miller

Judge overrode the jury’s recommendation and sentenced Miller to death

12120179 Jury returned guilty verdict against Jent

12121179 By a majority vote, jury recommended a death sentence for Jent

01/30/80 Judge sentenced Jent to death

Florida Supreme Court - Direct Appeal

FSC# 58,744

408 So.2d 1024

02/29/80 Appeal tiled

12/03/81 FSC affirmed conviction and sentence

U.S. Supreme Court - Petition for Writ of Certiorari

USSC# 8 l-6549

457 U.S. 1111

04/ 16182 Petition filed

Jent, W. & Miller, E. 3

Trial Court - 3.850 Motion

Case# 79-847

07/01/83 Motion filed

07/l 3183 Trial court denied Motion

Florida Supreme Court - 3.850 Motion Appeal

FSC# 63,957

435 So.2d 809

07113183

07/l 8183

Appeal filed

FSC affirmed denial of Motion

U.S. District Court, Southern District - Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

USDC# 83-860-Civ-T-13

07/l 5183

1 O/25/84

Petition tiled

USDC denied Petition

U.S. Court of Appeals, llfh Circuit - Habeas Petition Appeal

USCA# 85-3 185

798 F.2d 426

04/01/85

08/l 4186

Appeal filed

USCA vacated and remanded to USDC for reconsideration

U.S. Supreme Court - Petition for Writ of Certiorari (filed by State)

USSC# 86-1050

480 U.S. 901

12122186 Appeal filed

03/02/87 USSC vacated and remanded to USCA

U.S. Court of Appeals, llth Circuit - Habeas Petition Appeal (on remand)

USCA# 85-3 185

06/l 2187 USCA ordered USDC to continue with reconsideration

U.S. District Court, Southern District - Habeas Petition (on remand)

USDC# 85-1910-Civ-T-15

Jent, W. & Miller, E. 4

Florida Supreme Court - Direct Appeal

FSC# 58,785

415 So.2d 1262

03/07/80 Appeal filed

03125182 FSC affirmed conviction and sentence

U.S. Supreme Court - Petition for Writ of Certiorari

USSC# 82-5590

459 U.S. 1158

1 O/20/82

01/17/83

Petition filed

USSC denied Petition

Trial Court - 3.850 Motion

Case# 79-847

06124183

07/l 3183

Motion filed

Trial court denied Motion

Florida Supreme Court - 3.850 Motion Appeal

FSC# 63,958

435 So.2d 813

07113183

07/l 8183

Appeal filed

FSC affirmed denial of Motion

U.S. District Court, Southern District - Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

USDC# 83-849-Civ-T-15

07/l 4183

1 O/25/84

Petition filed

USDC denied Petition

U.S. Court of Appeals, llfh Circuit - Habeas Petition Appeal

USCA# 85-3 175

798 F.2d 426

03/15/85 Appeal filed

Jent, W. & Miller, E. 5

U.S. Supreme Court - Petition for Writ of Certiorari (filed by State)

USSC# 86-1050

480 U.S. 901

12122186 Appeal filed

03/02/87 USSC vacated and remanded

U.S. Court of Appeals, llfh Circuit - Habeas Petition Appeal (on remand)

USCA# 85-3 175

06/12/87 USCA ordered USDC to continue with reconsideration

U.S. District Court, Southern District - Habeas Petition (on remand)

USDC# 86-98-Civ-T-13

1 l/13/87 Petition granted and new trial ordered

Death Warrant Information:

06123183

07/l 8183

Warrants issued for Jent and Miller and executions set for 07/l 9/83

Stays issued by USDC

Clemency Hearing:

0313 l/83 Clemency hearings held (denied)

Case Information - Jent:

Jent filed a Direct Appeal with the Florida Supreme Court on 02/29/80, citing the

following trial court errors: failure to provide him with transcripts of grand jury

testimony; failure to grant a motion for continuance; insufficiency of evidence; failure to

exclude cameras from the courtroom; inability to identify the victim; denial of motion for

a new trial, based on new evidence; improper limiting of mitigating evidence; and

unconstitutionality of the cold, calculated, and premeditated aggravating circumstance.

The FSC affirmed the conviction and sentence on 12/03/81.

Jent filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court on 04/16/82 that

was denied on 06/07/82.

Jent filed a 3.850 Motion with the Trial Court on 07/01/83 that was denied on 07/13/83.

Jent tiled a 3.850 Motion Appeal with the Florida Supreme Court on 07/13/83, citing

errors in failure to hold an evidentiary hearing regarding prosecutorial misconduct, failure

to find his counsel ineffective, and denial of due process due to the speed of the

Jent, W. & Miller, E. 6

Jent filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus with the U.S. District Court on 07/l 5183,

citing numerous claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, as well as failure to provide

him with transcripts of grand jury testimony. The USDC denied the Petition on 1 O/25/84.

Jent filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals on

04/01/85. On 08/14/86, the USCA vacated the USDC’s decision and remanded to

reconsider the claim involving the transcripts of grand jury testimony.

The State filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court on 12/22/86.

On 03/02/87, the USSC granted the Petition, vacated the USCA’s decision and remanded

for reconsideration.

On 06/12/87, the USCA ordered the USDC to continue to reconsider the case.

On 1 l/l 3187, the USDC granted the Habeas Petition and ordered a retrial.

Case Information - Miller:

Miller filed a Direct Appeal with the Florida Supreme Court on 03/07/80, citing the

following trial court errors: failure to provide him with transcripts of grand jury

testimony; insufficiency of evidence; inability to identify the victim; denial of motion for

r-

’

a new trial, based on new evidence; improper limiting of mitigating evidence; and

unconstitutionality of the cold, calculated, and premeditated aggravating circumstance;

failure to suppress a fellow inmate’s statement; and erroneous override of the jury’s

Miller tiled a Petition for Writ of Certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court on 10/20/82

that was denied on 01/l 7/83.

Miller filed a 3.850 Motion with the trial court on 06/24/83 that was denied on 07/13/83.

Miller filed a 3.850 Motion Appeal with the Florida Supreme Court on 07/13/83, citing

errors in failure to hold an evidentiary hearing regarding prosecutorial misconduct, failure

to find his counsel ineffective, and failure to allow Miller to amend the Motion. The FSC

affirmed the denial of the Motion on 07/l 8/83.

Miller filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals

on 03/l 5/85. On 08/l 4186, the USCA vacated the USDC’s decision and remanded to

Jent, W. & Miller, E. 7

The State filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court on 12/22/86.

On 03/02/87, the USSC granted the Petition, vacated the USCA’s decision and remanded

for reconsideration.

On 06/12/87, the USCA ordered the USDC to continue to reconsider the case.

On 1 l/13/87, the USDC granted the Habeas Petition and ordered a retrial.

Law Enforcement/Prosecution Statements:

Bernie McCabe, State Attorney for the 6th Judicial Circuit, had the following statement

regarding the Jent and Miller case:

Contrary to later assertions, neither Miller nor Jent had an alibi for the time of the

murder nor was there any substantial evidence that the murder had not occurred

on the date initially testified to by the State’s eyewitnesses. According to

eyewitnesses, the murder took place sometime during the evening of the 1 2th or

the morning of the 13*. Miller initially told Detective Armstrong that he and Jent

had gone to the Renegade’s Club House in Tampa on the morning of Friday the

13*. He then told Armstrong that he might have stayed home on Friday the 13th

or might have gone to the "swing" (the location of the party by the river where the

incident began) that.night. In a taped statement to a Tampa officer, Jent admitted

that the victim had been with him and Miller the night of the murder and that she

had been in their car and in Miller’s house.

Sometime after the crime, Armstrong, a detective with little homicide experience

who had been assigned to assist in the investigation, had interviewed a family

who had been picnicking near the river on Friday the 13’h about 250 yards from

where the body lay in the woods and two other individuals who were fishing

about a quarter of a mile down the river. Although he had no logical basis to

reach such a conclusion, Armstrong wrote a report hypothesizing that since these

individuals had not noticed the body, it was likely placed there after Friday

afternoon. While this detective’s failure to report this "conclusion" to the defense

was one of the bases for the Federal Court’s decision to grant a new trial, the

witnesses themselves, once they were advised of the actual location of the body,

indicated that they would not have seen it from their locations.

The State was preparing to retry both defendants, but agreed to accept a plea to

the lesser charge of second degree murder, accompanied by a sworn

acknowledgment of guilt. Factors involved in this decision included the fact that

the hair fragment identified with Jent had been lost or destroyed by the clerk’s

office, that Jent’s taped statement to the Tampa police had not been preserved,

that eyewitnesses had changed their testimony and that corroborating witnesses

The State would also disagree with collateral defense counsel’s assertion that Dr.

Ronald Wright testified that the testimony of eyewitnesses was "impossible".

Wright testified in the State post conviction proceedings and offered a varying

opinion as to cause of death. He did not testify that the eyewitnesses’ testimony

that the body moved was impossible, but instead proposed an alternative

explanation that the described movement could have been the result of the

shortening of the muscles due to burning rather than a voluntary motion by the

victim while she was still conscious. He also acknowledged that the case

presented a "close question" and that other reasonably trained forensic

pathologists could differ as to whether the victim was alive or dead at the time of

the fire. Thus, while his testimony may have disputed the existence of an

aggravating factor, it was not significantly relevant to the defendants’ guilt or

innocence.

Defense Statements:

Howardene Garrett, collateral appeals attorney for Ernie Miller, had the following

statement regarding the Jent and Miller case:

Ms. Garrett stated that the condition of the body of the victim, particularly the larynx,

contradicted the statements of two of the female witnesses to the murder. Garrett noted:

Of special importance was the condition of the throat, because the two women

had added to their initial testimony the detail that the victim had tried to raise

herself right before she was immolated. This was important because it would

show consciousness and therefore awareness of pain, adding the important

aggravating factor that the victim needlessly suffered and the crime was therefore

heinous, atrocious, and cruel. . . . [the Broward County Medical Examiner at the

time, Dr. Ronald Wright concluded] "the testimony of the two women was

physically impossible, because the victim was unconscious and probably dead

when set on fire.

Ms. Garrett also commented as to the veracity of the statements of the two female

witnesses to the murder. The defense counsel investigator:

was able to track down the young women who had testified. Even more amazing

was the fact that both women recanted their testimony. Both were interviewed on

camera by the television program ‘20120,’ which aired a segment on this case, and

told of how the detectives had intimidated them into giving testimony, telling then

how the crime had supposedly happened and then encouraging then to testify

accordingly to avoid their own prosecution.

.P-.

Ms. Garrett also commented on the alleged tactics of the State in this case. According to

Garrett, "This case is by no means unique. The death penalty pushes law enforcement

investigators and prosecutors harder for conviction, and, being human, they can and do

Prior to the retrial, Jent and Miller pled guilty to Second-Degree Murder, were sentenced

to time already served, and were released from prison on 01/20/88.

There is no information available as to Jent or Miller’s criminal history subsequent to

their release.

Alternate Prosecuted Suspect:

Elmer Carroll, a cousin of Bradshaw, alleged that Bradshaw’s boyfriend, Bobby Dodd,

committed the murder. When questioned by police, however, Carroll recanted the

statement. When Carroll was to be sentenced for a separate child molestation charge, he

again implicated Dodd in the Bradshaw murder. During a hearing on a motion for a new

trial for Jent and Miller, Carroll again recanted his allegation. Carroll’s family came

forward with testimony that Carroll had admitted to lying about Dodd’s involvement, and

that Carroll had first came forward with the allegation against Dodd in exchange for

money and drugs from the families of Jent and Miller. However, the State did uncover

inmates who claimed that Dodd had implicated himself, along with Jent and Miller, in the

murder of Bradshaw.

Report Date: 03/29/02 JFL

P

Approved: 04/04/02 WS

KEATON, Dave Roby (B/M)

DC# 030350

DOB: 02105152

Second Judicial Circuit, Leon County, Case # 6366

Sentencing Judge: The Honorable Guyte P. McCord, Jr.

Trial Attorney: Harry L. Michaels, Private

Attorneys, Direct Appeal: Kent Springs, Paul L. Ross, James Reif, Morton Stavis,

Margaret Ratner, Private

Date of Sentence: 05/l l/71

Circumstances of the Offense:

At approximately 2:30 p.m. on September 18, 1970, two deputy sheriffs assigned as

jailors of Leon County, Thomas Revels and Hallie M. Carroll, entered Luke’s Store to

make a purchase. Three armed black males, who were in the process of robbing the store,

ordered the two unarmed officers to the east side of the building and directed them to lie

down on the floor with the four other victims of the robbery. After taking the deputies’

money, one of the black males stated, "We are going to kill everybody in here and start

with the women." Deputy Revels jumped to his feet and grabbed one of the assailants and

a struggle ensued. Deputy Revels was shot under the left armpit and in the back of the

head. Deputy Carroll attempted to aid Deputy Revels, and he was shot once in the

stomach and once in the mouth. Deputy Carroll survived the attack; however, Deputy

Revels died as a result of his wounds.

Five defendants were indicted for the felony murder described above: Keaton, Johnny

Frederick, Alphonso Figgers, Johnny Lee Bums, and David Charles Smith, Jr. and

Frederick. These five defendants were known as "the Quincy Five." Keaton and

Frederick were tried together while a severance was granted for a separate trial for the

other three defendants because Keaton and Frederick had given written statements that

implicated Smith, Bums, and Figgers. Keaton gave three separate confessions to different

officers on different days, two of which were recorded. Frederick also gave an oral

confession to law enforcement officers. Frederick reenacted the crime and explained how

he, Keaton, and the other defendants committed the robbery. Frederick stated that the car

belonging to ‘the Quincy Five’ was parked around the side of Luke’s Store prior to the

robbery.

After the trial of Keaton and Frederick, but before Smith’s trial, three more defendants

Keaton, D. 2

fingerprints found at the scene. These individuals were John Allen Mitchell, James

Fussell, and Jessie Henry Damon, These defendants were called "the Jacksonville Three."

The evidence presented at "the Jacksonville Three’s" trial was exculpatory to the trials of

"the Quincy Five. " Due to the fact that Smith had not yet been tried, the evidence

implicating three additional suspects was utilized in his defense. No fingerprints from any

of "the Quincy Five" were found at the scene, because as Keaton stated in his

confessions, he and Smith wore gloves.

During the original trial, Keaton, Frederick, Bums, and Smith were identified by

eyewitnesses as participants of the robbery. Deputy Carrel identified Smith as the

shooter. In all of the trials, the evidence reflected that Luke’s store was approximately

4,000 square feet and contained various entrances. These factors made it impossible to

see everyone within the establishment, a fact that was mirrored in the eyewitness

testimonies. Different eyewitnesses saw different robbers at different times in different

number combinations ranging from 1 to 5. The same eyewitnesses identified four of the

"Quincy Five" at all of the trials as participating in the robbery, two of which specifically

identified Keaton as one of the robbers.

Additional Information:

Keaton was indicted on unrelated charges of two counts of Armed Robbery and one

count of Assault with Intent to Commit First-Degree Murder on January 18, 1971. On

/---

lOJ13J72, he pled no contest to the charges and was sentenced to two concurrent twenty-

year sentences. In his statement, Keaton admitted his guilt. He was released and paroled

on 07/24/79 and his parole was terminated on 09109181.

Codefendant Information:

Johnny Fredrick was tried with Keaton and found guilty. The jury recommended mercy

for Fredrick, who, consequently was sentenced to life. The sentence and conviction were

overturned.

Johnny Lee Bums was found incompetent and did not stand trial. He was committed to

the State Hospital.

Alphonso Figgers’ case was nolle prossed due to insufficient evidence. Figgers is

currently serving a life sentence for Robbery with a Firearm.

A jury tried David Charles Smith, Jr. after the conviction of "the Jacksonville Three."

Smith was acquitted of all charges.

John Allen Mitchell was tried by a jury and found guilty on January 14,1972. The jury

recommended mercy; therefore, Mitchell was sentenced to life.

Jessie Henry Damon was tried by a jury and found guilty on December 16,197l. The

Keaton, D. 3

A jury tried James Fussell. He was found guilty on April 7, 1972. The jury did not

recommend mercy, and Fussell was sentenced to death.

Trial Summary:

01/28/71

05/06/7 1

05/l l/71

The defendant was indicted for First-Degree Murder. The defendant pled

not guilty.

The defendant was found guilty.

A majority of the jury did not recommend mercy; therefore, the defendant

received an automatic death sentence due to the law at the time.

Retrial Information:

02121173 FSC remanded the case for a new trial

07/l 9173 The State Attorney nolle prossed the case

Florida State Supreme Court, Direct Appeal

FSC# 4123 1

273 So. 2d 385

0512817 1

0712 1 I72

09/08/72

1 l/14/72

0212 1 I73

03/l 5/73

Appeal filed.

FSC relinquished jurisdiction to the Circuit Court for an evidentiary

hearing.

Defendant’s sentence was converted to life, as per the Anderson v. Florida

decision’.

Circuit Court stated that a new trial was needed.

FSC remanded for new trial.

Mandate issued.

Case Information:

Keaton filed a Direct Appeal with the Florida Supreme Court on 05128171. Keaton’s

sentence was converted to life based upon the rulings of Furman v. Georgia and

Anderson v. Florida’. Frederick filed a 3.850 Motion in the Circuit Court alleging that the

existence of newly discovered evidence was withheld by the State. The evidence

connected the "Jacksonville Three" to the crime. This evidence was presented by the

defense in the trial of a codefendant, Smith. The state made a motion to the Florida

Supreme Court to relinquish jurisdiction of Keaton’s case to the Circuit Court for

consolidation with Frederick’s motion. On 07/22/72, the Florida Supreme Court

v. Georgia did not divest the court’s jurisdiction over capital appeals pending at the time Furman was

Keaton, D. 4

trial was needed. On 02/21/73, the Florida Supreme Court adopted the Circuit Court’s

recommendation and vacated Keaton’s judgment and sentence.

The Florida Supreme Court remanded the case for a new trial; subsequently, the State

Attorney decided to nolle prosse the case. The factors contributing to the decision not to

prosecute were as follows: (a) the crime was no longer a capital crime due to a change in

legislation, (b) Keaton, who was not the triggerman, was already serving 20 years for

another robbery case, and (c) several of the eyewitnesses were physically ill and further

trials could possibly contribute to the additional deterioration of their health.

Prosecution/Law Enforcement Statement:

Harry Morrison, the State Attorney who tried the case, passed away in 1980. The

following are excerpts from the Nolle Prosequi that Mr. Morrison filed when he chose

not to retry the case:

In the course of this first trial the confessions of Keaton and Frederick were duly

admitted into evidence.

‘‘.

Mr. Keaton implicated himself and the four other defendants.

Mr. Frederick implicated himself and the four other defendants

Mr. Keaton first gave an oral, confession to a State officer, namely special -

agent Joe Townsend of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. This statement

was given on January 13, 1971. Almost immediately thereafter, on the same date,

Keaton gave a detailed recorded confession to Lt. Melvin Terry of the Leon County

Sheriffs office. This statement was witnessed by deputy sheriff Charles Landrum.

On the next day, January 14, 1971, Capt. Lavelle Pitts of the Leon County Sheriffs

took an even more detailed recorded confession from the defendant Keaton.

In one of his statements Keaton indicated that he and Smith wore gloves so as to leave

no fingerprints.

The defendant Frederick also first orally confessed to the same officer, Mr. Townsend,

on January 14, 1971, the defendant Frederick also gave a recorded statement in detail to

Lt. Terry, which was witnessed by Capt. Pitts.

In his statement Frederick stated that the car they were riding in was parked around

the side of Luke’s Store prior to the robbery.

Lt. Terry testified how in January 15, 1971, he and deputy sheriff Landrum were

accompanied by Johnny Frederick who reenacted in minute detail the route by which

Frederick and the other named defendants came to Tallahassee from Quincy on the

afternoon of the robbery.

Lt. Terry testified how Frederick located and pointed out the Jr. Food Store quick

service center, 2411 Jackson Bluff Road, where the tape used to bind the victims was

purchased.

Mrs. Dorothy Lindsay, manager of this Jr. Food Store, identified the tape found in the

Luke Store and testified at the trial that it was purchased from her by four black males

Keaton, D. 5

In the course of this first trial defendants Keaton and Frederick, as well as

defendants Burns and Smith, were definitely identified by witnesses as participants in

the robbery resulted in the death of deputy sheriff Revels.

In this first trial, and in four subsequent separate trials of other defendants charged

with the same crime, defendant David Charles Smith was identified by Mr. Carroll as

the trigger man who actually pulled the trigger of the pistol which killed Mr. Revels.

It will be noted that many unidentified fingerprints were developed in the Luke Store

during the original investigation of this robbery and murder.

Later, during the year 1971, the State Attorney was given the name of three additional

suspects for fingerprint comparison with these latents developed and listed at the scene of

the crime. The fingerprints of these suspects were compared with certain latents at the

specific locations in the store, and on articles, which were obviously handled by the

robbers in the store.

The latent fingerprints of one Henry Damon were developed from scattered cartons of

cigarettes found in the floor under the cash register; also Damon’s prints were lifted from

a jar of pennies in the store office and from the filing cabinet in the same office.

The latent palm prints of one John Allen Mitchell were developed from an outside

wrapper of a pack of hose found among several packages of scattered hose recovered

from the east aisle of the store. Also Mitchell’s fingerprints were on the outside cover of

an unopened package of hose found in the floor at another location further back in the

same east aisle.

The latent fingerprints of John Allen Mitchell and James Fussell were developed from

a brown paper sack containing two rolls of tape found on the frozen food counter

adjacent to the east aisle.

The latent fingerprints of Fussel were also found on one of four different

packages of hose picked up by an officer who originally investigated the crime

scene (All of the above allegations with reference to the fingerprints of Damon,

Mitchell and Fussell were later brought out by sworn testimony at their

subsequent trials.)

Further investigation developed evidence indicating that John Allen Mitchell,

James Fussell and Jessie Henry Damon were traveling together in Tallahassee at the

time of the robbery and were prime suspects in the same robbery resulting in the

death of Mr. Revels.

The State proved "The Jacksonville 3" guilty by circumstantial evidence, and

beyond a reasonable doubt they were all personally present and participating in the

same robbery even though they were not actually seen or recognized by eye

witnesses.

The evidence in all of these trials reflected that Luke’s store contained an estimated

4000 square feet of floor space with various entrances including doors on the east, north

and south; that it was heavily loaded with aisles of merchandise making it impossible for

persons in the store to see everyone else who may be moving about in this store. The

evidence at each trial clearly reflected that the various eye witnesses saw different

robbers at different times ranging in different numbers from 1 to 5. The number they saw

depended on the location of the witnesses and the restrictions imposed on them by these

robbers who were armed and threatening to kill the witnesses if they attempted to look up

Keaton, D. 6

In all of the above cases, beginning with the first trial, of Keaton and Frederick, of,

the "Quincy 5" and in each of the three separate trials of "The Jacksonville 3"

substantially the same eye witnesses appeared and testified under oath and definitely

identified four of the "Quincy 5" defendants as also participating in the same robbery

which resulted in the murder of Mr. Revels

These witnesses included Mrs. Gwynn Phillips, Mrs. P. B. Deter, Mr. Hallie

M. Carroll, Mr. Luther W. Adamson, Mr. Cleo Simmons and Mrs. Dorothy

Lindsay.

These same witnesses gave sworn testimony in five separate trials that put four of

the "Quincy 5" defendants, including Keaton and Frederick, at the scene and

participating in the robbery that led to the death of Mr. Revels. The fifth man in the

"Quinsy 5" group, namely, Alphonso Figgers, was tentatively identified by Mrs.

Phillips as also being there and this defendant Figgers was also implicated in the

confessions of Keaton and Frederick which were received in evidence at their first

trial

/---

It was the State’s theory and argument to the court and jury in each trial of "the

Jacksonville 3"’ and in the later trial of David Charles Smith, Jr. that the subsequent

identification of additional defendants did not exonerate the "Quincy 5"; that this was

simply additional evidence leading to the identification of additional participants in the

same crime and did not affect the guilt or innocence of the "Quincy 5"; that the evidence

showed that the car of "The Jacksonville 3" was backed into a side street east

of the store; both the Quincy 5" and "the Jacksonville 3" were all there in two

automobiles in which they made their escape following the robbery.

That was also this State Attorney’s contention in all other proceedings dealing with the

question of a new trial for defendants Keaton and Frederick.

In making the decision to enter this nolle prosequi in the case of Keaton and

Frederick, it should be noted that the State Attorney is not obliged to present all charges

which the evidence might support; neither is he obliged to prosecute all defendants

against whom evidence exists which would support a conviction.

It is well established that the prosecutor may in some circumstances and for

good cause decline to prosecute a defendant notwithstanding that evidence exists

which would support his conviction

It is interesting to note that this particular case is no longer a capital crime.

While the legislature has since enacted a new capital crimes law, this particular case

falls within the category of a non-capital. If it was tried it would be before a six-may

jury. Keaton, who was not the triggerman, is already serving 20 years for robbery in

another case imposed in Leon County, October 13, 1972.

So the question arises as to whether further prosecution of Keaton would serve

any good purpose consistent with the public interest since he is already serving 20 years

in the State prison. In fact, all eight of the defendants charged with the murder of Mr.

Revels have been removed from society for some time as follows:

1. Dave Roby Keaton is currently serving a sentence 20 years

imposed 1 O/l 3/72 in Leon County for robbery

2. Alphonso Figgers is currently serving a sentence of life on one count of

Keaton, D. 7

sentenced from Jackson County 10/13/72; still wanted by U.S Government for

violation of gun law; detainer placed.

3 David Charles Smith, Jr. is currently serving two sentences of 25 years

each from Leon County for robbery, and 10 years from Gadsden County for bombing a

power plant; all of said sentences will run concurrently but will not run concurrently

with any other sentences he may receive in the Federal court. He is presently wanted by

US Government for violation of gun law; detainer placed; also wanted by Jackson

County for robbery;

detainer placed

4. Johnny Lee Bums is reported incurably insane and has been

committed to the State Hospital at Chattahoochee since early 1971.

5. Jessie Damon is currently serving a sentence of life in the State prison

from Leon County for the murder of Mr. Revels.

6. John Allen Mitchell is currently serving a sentence of life in the

State prison from Leon County for the murder of Mr. Revels.

7 James Fussell is currently serving a sentence of life in the State prison

from Leon County for the murder of Mr. Revels

8. Johnny Frederick is currently serving a sentence of life in the State

prison imposed May 1, 1971, for the murder of Mr. Revels, he has been

granted a new trial and this nolle prosequi will have the effect of releasing

him. It as noted, however, that Johnny Frederick has not been identified as

a member of the gang that Smith, Keaton, Burns and Figgers were

associated with. He has no known criminal record. In his confession he

declared he was outside in the car and was not actually participating in the

robbery as such which resulted in the death of Mr. Revels. There is no

evidence that his release at this time would necessarily be against the

public interest

Another factor to consider is the continuing expense to the State. This case will

obviously be appealed by attorneys for the defendants in the event of a second conviction

of either of them.

But a most important factor which the prosecutor may properly consider in

exercising his discretion deal with witnesses.

These cases have already been tried five times in two years, or since May 3, 197 1.

Each trial was about one week: this retrial could be stretched longer than that. Many of

the same witnesses have been summoned for each trial; on each of these occasions they

have been very willing, cooperative and patient, although their appearance was always at

great discomfort inconvenience and expense to themselves.

One had a heart attack before the first trial, although she has since appeared at

subsequent trials. Two other very material eyewitnesses are ill. The latter two have

testified in five trials and were ill when they testified in the last trial. A continuance of the

Keaton and Frederick re-trial to permit their recovery would serve little if any purpose.

The doctor for one of them has advised that his patient is unable to testify even though

she has agree to cooperate and try to do so.

An affidavit from the doctor for one material eyewitness reflects that her further

appearances in his opinion will deteriorate her existing condition and damage her

While she is willing to try to do so, she cannot assure the State that she will be able to do

so.

The undersigned State Attorney feels an obligation to these witnesses in making

the decision to enter this nolle prosequi. The conviction of Keaton and Frederick for

any of the several offenses embraced within the indictment is not worth taking a

chance of injuring the health of one single witness.

THEREFORE, the undersigned State Attorney respectfully says that the case of State of

Florida vs. Dave Roby Keaton and Johnny Frederick is nolle prosequi

04/08/02

04/l 2102

05/23/02

Letter sent to Leon County Sheriffs Department requesting comment.

Received case information; however no statement was provided.

Placed telephone call to Leon County Sheriffs Department. Receptionist

will have an individual who is familiar with the case return the call. No

comment had been received as of 05/28/02.

Defense Statement:

Trial attorney (defense), Harry Lewis Michaels, made the following comments in regard

to the Dave Roby Keaton case:

"I never did believe that the eye witness testimony was that strong and convincing. It was

confusing. However, even without the confessions, the testimony probably would have

been sufficient to convict.

The lack of fingerprints of any of the five defendants was, of course, strongly argued by

the defense.

The confessions bothered me from the outset. Keaton did not present the usual

accusations, such as threats, beatings, etc. He said that after awhile he just threw up his

hands and said: "if you say it was that way, it must have been." It was not until the trial

that I got the revelation as to what occurred during the interrogation.

The polygraph operator is the one who obtained the confession. It was through trickery,

chicanery, lying by the operator, deviousness and just plain unethical conduct, that a

confession was obtained. I had nothing but contempt for this state witness. Judge McCord

expressed concern over the methods used in obtaining the confession, but, after

considerable deliberation, did allow the confession into evidence.

Up until the trial I had believed the confessions were probably voluntary. Keaton and his

mother at one point expressed concern that I did not believe in his innocence and

questioned whether I should be representing him. I devoted five months almost

exclusively to this court appointed task. My partners took over my workload at my law

firm. So regardless of Keaton’s concern, I gave it all I had on his behalf. As the trial

progressed, coerced through fraud and trickery, no fingerprints and shaky eye witness

Keaton, D. 9

I followed the "Jacksonville Three" case with great interest. The fact that not any of the

"Quincy Five" were on the premises all were innocent of that robbery and murder, shows

how our criminal justice system just fails us at times. The confession should not have

been admitted into evidence. The death penalty should not be given on shaky eye witness

testimony."

Current status:

Subsequent to his release, Keaton was arrested on a DUI charge. NCIC does not show

any other arrests.