Ferguson v. State
101 So. 3d 362
| Fla. | 2012Background
- Ferguson, a death-sentenced prisoner, filed a second successive postconviction motion under Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.851 and a separate competency-determination motion.
- He had multiple prior murder convictions and ongoing direct appeals with remands for mitigating-s circumstances review.
- The circuit court denied all postconviction claims and the competency motion.
- This Court previously affirmed the earlier postconviction denials and related habeas petitions.
- Ferguson challenged execution protocol separation-of-powers issues, clemency participation, the death-warrant process, punishment length on death row, and competency.
- The Court now affirms the circuit court, concluding each claim was properly denied as untimely or legally unsustainable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Separation of powers and execution protocol delegation | Ferguson argues the statute delegates too much to the executive branch | State contends the claim is foreclosed by precedent and lacks timeliness | Untimely and rejected on merits |
| Clemency Proceedings timeliness and process | Clemency was constitutionally inadequate due to incomplete participation | Claim untimely and properly denied; not ripe until due process considerations | Claim properly denied as time-barred |
| Warrant selection process constitutional challenges | Arbitrary process and unfettered Governor discretion unconstitutional | Claims previously rejected by Florida Supreme Court; properly pleaded but merit lacking | Denied based on controlling precedents |
| Cruel and unusual punishment from long death-row duration | Decades on death row violate Eighth Amendment | Courts have repeatedly rejected similar challenges | Denied; long delay not constitutionally prohibited |
| Competency determination in collateral proceedings | Ferguson suffers mental illness; merits an input-based competency review | Rule 3.851(g) requires timeliness; no timely basis for competency hearing | Denied; competency hearing not warranted given untimely claims |
Key Cases Cited
- Power v. State, 992 So.2d 218 (Fla. 2008) (separation-of-powers and lethal-injection procedural challenges guided by precedent)
- Diaz v. State, 945 So.2d 1136 (Fla. 2006) (rejected separation-of-powers attack on protocol)
- Sims v. State, 754 So.2d 657 (Fla. 2000) (reaffirmed separation-of-powers rulings on execution method)
- Marek v. State, 8 So.3d 1123 (Fla. 2009) (postconviction hearing decisions; de novo review standard)
- Reynolds v. State, 99 So.3d 459 (Fla. 2012) (timeliness and evidentiary-hearing standards in 3.851 motions)
- Walker v. State, 88 So.3d 128 (Fla. 2012) (supplemental guidance on procedural default and review)
- Schwab v. State, 969 So.2d 318 (Fla. 2007) (illustrative on timing of lethal-injection claims)
- Johnston v. State, 27 So.3d 11 (Fla. 2010) (limits on clemency-related litigation in collateral proceedings)
- Carter v. State, 706 So.2d 873 (Fla. 1997) (adoption of Carter-Carter rule on competency in postconviction)
- Jackson v. State, 452 So.2d 533 (Fla. 1984) (Overton concurrence cited on competency triggering standard)
- Harbison v. Bell, 556 U.S. 180 (2009) (U.S. Supreme Court; clemency as last resort in capital cases)
- Herrera v. Collins, 506 U.S. 390 (1993) (standards for postconviction evidence in capital cases)
- Gore v. State, 91 So.3d 769 (Fla.) (death-warrant process decisions respecting existing precedent)
- Valle v. State, 70 So.3d 530 (Fla.) (limitations on challenges to warrant-process and timing)
- Tompkins v. State, 994 So.2d 1072 (Fla. 2008) (cruel-and-unusual-punishment considerations on long death-row terms)
- Lucas v. State, 841 So.2d 380 (Fla. 2003) (long death-row duration not alone unconstitutional)
- Rose v. State, 787 So.2d 786 (Fla. 2001) (fate of long death-row challenges)
- Malicoat v. State, 137 P.3d 1234 (Okla. Crim. App. 2006) (comparator in lethal-injection protocol analysis)