Banks v. State
150 So. 3d 797
Fla.2014Background
- Banks murdered his wife and, thereafter, sexually assaulted his ten-year-old stepdaughter before fatally shooting her.
- Ballistic and DNA evidence linked the crimes to Banks, corroborating his confession and semen found in the victim.
- Banks pleaded no contest to two counts of first-degree murder and one count of sexual battery; the wife’s murder was not subject to the death penalty.
- Banks was sentenced to death for the stepdaughter’s murder, with concurrent life terms for the wife’s murder and sexual battery.
- After a death warrant was signed, Banks sought public records; the trial court sustained objections to broad requests and Banks’ second postconviction motion was filed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel | Banks argues Martinez/Trevino apply to allow new claims. | State argues Martinez/Trevino do not authorize state-court relief in postconviction context for these claims. | Martinez/Trevino do not authorize state-court relief; claims foreclosed. |
| Lethal injection protocol constitutionality | Banks asserts midazolam/vecuronium violate Eighth Amendment due to risk of pain. | State maintains current protocol is constitutional and previously upheld. | Protocol remains constitutional; no new evidence justifies reconsideration. |
| Public records requests | Banks seeks records; claims requests relate to colorable postconviction relief claims. | Agencies properly denied as not reasonably related to colorable claims. | Trial court did not abuse discretion; requests were not relevant to colorable claims. |
Key Cases Cited
- Martinez v. Ryan, 132 S. Ct. 1309 (2012) (Martinez clarifies when defaulted claims may be heard in federal habeas)
- Trevino v. Thaler, 133 S. Ct. 1911 (2013) (applies Martinez in a Texas state-law context)
- Howell v. State, 109 So.3d 763 (Fla. 2013) (state postconviction claims of ineffective assistance not cognizable)
- Chavez v. State, 132 So.3d 1067 (Fla. 2013) (affirms limits on postconviction relief claims)
- Gore v. State, 91 So.3d 769 (Fla. 2012) (reaffirmed postconviction standards and Eighth Amendment interpretation)
- Muhammad v. State, 132 So.3d 176 (Fla. 2013) (Eighth Amendment challenges to Florida’s protocol foreclosed)
- Pardo v. State, 108 So.3d 558 (Fla. 2012) (courts may reject protocol challenges lacking concrete basis)
- Davis v. State, 142 So.3d 867 (Fla. 2014) (public records requests reviewed under abuse of discretion)