Dale Glenn Middleton v. State of Florida
220 So. 3d 1152
Fla.2017Background
- Victim Roberta Christensen was stabbed to death in her trailer on July 28, 2009; defendant Dale Middleton lived across the street and had prior social contact with her.
- Middleton admitted (on videotape) he entered her trailer armed with a knife, assaulted her after she refused to give money, cut her throat, stole her television, and later sold the television.
- Physical and forensic evidence (blood spatter, drag marks, numerous stab wounds, bloody shoe impressions, blood on Middleton’s boots) corroborated the struggle and linked Middleton to the scene.
- A jury convicted Middleton of first‑degree premeditated murder, first‑degree felony murder, burglary of an occupied dwelling while armed, and dealing in stolen property, and recommended death 12–0; the trial court imposed death.
- On appeal, Middleton challenged (inter alia) two aggravators (avoid‑arrest/witness elimination and CCP), the denial of suppression of his confession (Miranda/waiver/attorney invocation), sufficiency of evidence, denial of a mitigation specialist and continuance, sentencing personalization, jury instructions, and whether Hurst error required relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Middleton) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of avoid‑arrest/witness‑elimination aggravator | Facts (knew victim, brought knife, victim alone) support eliminating witness to avoid ID/arrest | Killing was a robbery that escalated; avoiding arrest was not sole or dominant motive | Avoid‑arrest aggravator STRUCK; record not sufficient to show sole/dominant motive was witness elimination |
| Validity of CCP aggravator | Procurement of knife and post‑murder steps (washing, hiding clothes) show cold, calculated, premeditated murder | Evidence shows robbery gone bad and a frenzied, impulsive killing during struggle | CCP aggravator STRUCK; insufficient competent, substantial evidence of heightened premeditation |
| Admission of videotaped confession (Miranda/waiver/invocation of counsel) | Middleton initiated final interview, waived rights knowingly; confession voluntary | Middleton was intoxicated/withdrawn and/or had invoked right to counsel; could not validly waive Miranda | Motion to suppress DENIED; totality of circumstances shows valid waiver and initiation by Middleton; invocation form was filed after confession |
| Sufficiency of evidence for first‑degree (premeditated and felony) murder | Forensic details (multiple stab wounds, nature of wounds, weapon, dragging, blood patterns) and burglary/consent revoked support both theories | Killing lacked premeditation; was robbery that got out of hand | CONVICTIONS AFFIRMED; evidence sufficient to support premeditated first‑degree murder and felony murder (consent revoked once victim resisted) |
| Sentencing errors: harmlessness after striking two aggravators & proportionality | Even without CCP and avoid‑arrest, HAC and felony/pecuniary aggravators (given great weight) plus unanimous jury recommend support death; Hurst error harmless beyond reasonable doubt | Struck aggravators and Hurst error could have affected jury findings; unanimous recommendation alone insufficient to prove unanimity on specific facts | DEATH SENTENCE UPHELD as proportional; Hurst error deemed harmless beyond reasonable doubt given unanimous 12–0 recommendation and strong remaining aggravation |
| Denial of mitigation specialist and continuance | Trial court provided investigator and experts; defense failed to show particularized need or diligence for continuance; no prejudice | Mitigation specialist essential; denial impaired mitigation presentation; denial of continuance hindered sequencing of lay/evidence | NO REVERSIBLE ERROR; court did not abuse discretion—defense failed to demonstrate prejudice or timely renew requests |
Key Cases Cited
- Davis v. State, 604 So.2d 794 (Fla. 1992) (avoid‑arrest aggravator requires that elimination of witness be sole or dominant motive when victim is not law enforcement)
- Green v. State, 583 So.2d 647 (Fla. 1991) (similar limits on witness‑elimination aggravator)
- Perry v. State, 522 So.2d 817 (Fla. 1988) (addressing witness elimination and proportionality issues)
- Castro v. State, 644 So.2d 987 (Fla. 1994) (robbery that gets out of hand insufficient for CCP)
- Franklin v. State, 965 So.2d 79 (Fla. 2007) (elements and high standard for CCP aggravator)
- Deparvine v. State, 995 So.2d 351 (Fla. 2008) (CCP involves much higher degree of premeditation than first‑degree murder)
- Geralds v. State, 674 So.2d 96 (Fla. 1996) (proportionality upholding death where HAC and felony/pecuniary aggravators remain and mitigation carried little weight)
- Hall v. State, 107 So.3d 262 (Fla. 2012) (premeditation may be inferred from manner of killing and wounds)
- Traylor v. State, 596 So.2d 957 (Fla. 1992) (Florida rule on invocation of counsel and reinitiation of interrogation)
- Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 (U.S. 1981) (once suspect requests counsel, interrogation must cease unless suspect initiates communication)