Derrick McLean v. State of Florida
147 So. 3d 504
Fla.2014Background
- Derrick McLean was convicted of first-degree murder (2004) for the killing of 15-year-old Jahvon Thompson; jury recommended death 9–3 and trial court imposed death.
- Independent inculpatory evidence included co-defendant testimony, DNA/blood on items from the victim’s home, photos of a gun on McLean’s phone, and items with McLean’s DNA recovered near a crash.
- On postconviction review McLean raised multiple claims including ineffective assistance of counsel (guilt- and penalty-phase), alleged destruction/reprocessing of a Crimeline tip tape, and challenges to Florida’s lethal injection law and competency-to-be-executed procedures.
- The circuit court held an evidentiary hearing on some claims and summarily denied others; the Florida Supreme Court reviews denial of the 3.851 motion and a habeas petition.
- The Court affirmed denial of all postconviction claims and denied habeas relief, concluding McLean failed to establish deficient performance or prejudice under Strickland, and that other claims were meritless or procedurally barred.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance at guilt phase for not calling an eyewitness-ID expert | McLean: counsel unreasonably failed to challenge Lewis’s ID with an expert | State: counsel reasonably relied on other strong evidence and pursued cross-examination/argument on ID | Denied — performance not shown deficient; no prejudice given independent evidence and defense attack on ID |
| Destruction/reprocessing of Crimeline tape & counsel’s failure to preserve it | McLean: tape reprocessing destroyed potentially exculpatory evidence; appellate counsel erred by not raising it | State: no bad faith destruction shown; tip was not clearly exculpatory and independent evidence existed; claim also procedurally raised below | Denied — no bad faith, no demonstrated exculpatory value, and no prejudice; related habeas claim procedurally barred |
| Ineffective assistance at penalty phase for not presenting ADHD evidence | McLean: additional ADHD evidence would have strengthened mitigation | State: evidence would be cumulative to presented mitigation and would not outweigh aggravators | Denied — no reasonable probability of a different sentence; cumulative evidence and little mitigating weight |
| Constitutional challenges to execution procedures and sentencing jury-majority | McLean: lethal injection statute and nonunanimous jury recommendation unconstitutional; risk of incompetency at execution violates Eighth Amendment | State: claims are speculative, repeatedly rejected by this Court, and premature | Denied — claims lack merit and are foreclosed by precedent |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes ineffective-assistance standard)
- Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 51 (due process claim for lost/destroyed evidence requires bad faith)
- McLean v. State, 29 So. 3d 1045 (Fla.) (direct-appeal opinion describing facts, convictions, and penalty-phase findings)
- Guzman v. State, 868 So. 2d 498 (Fla.) (loss of evidence violates due process only upon showing of bad faith)
- Rimmer v. State, 59 So. 3d 763 (Fla.) (no prejudice where counsel effectively impeached eyewitness IDs without expert)
- Hurst v. State, 18 So. 3d 975 (Fla.) (standards for assessing mitigation/prejudice in capital sentencing)
- Bolin v. State, 41 So. 3d 151 (Fla.) (Strickland discussion; courts may resolve prejudice before performance)
- Kimbrough v. State, 125 So. 3d 752 (Fla.) (rejecting challenge to nonunanimous jury recommendation for death)