Ferguson v. State
112 So. 3d 1154
Fla.2012Background
- Governor signed death warrant for Ferguson on Sept. 5, 2012 and set execution for Oct. 16, 2012; Ferguson claimed incompetence to be executed prompting a stay and commissioners to examine him; a joint report found him sane to be executed; circuit court conducted evidentiary hearing Oct. 9–10, 2012 with multiple experts and lay witnesses; circuit court entered Order Finding Ferguson Sane to be Executed on Oct. 12, 2012; this appeal challenges sanity to be executed and due process claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Ferguson is sane to be executed under controlling standards | Ferguson argues delusions show insanity and Panetti requires stricter standard | State contends competent substantive understanding exists; Provenzano standard applied | Competent, substantial evidence supports sanity finding |
| Whether Ferguson received a full and fair due process hearing | Forewarning, cross-examination, and witness access allegedly denied | Arguments meritless; hearing conducted under rule 3.812 with due process protections | Due process satisfied; no reversible error |
Key Cases Cited
- Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399 (U.S. 1986) (Eighth Amendment prohibition on executing the insane; adversarial hearing emphasized)
- Provenzano v. State, 760 So.2d 137 (Fla. 2000) (Florida standard: awareness of punishment and why; connection to crime)
- Panetti v. Quarterman, 551 U.S. 930 (U.S. 2007) (Clarified limits of Ford; not a universal standard for all competency determinations)
- Johnston v. State, 27 So.3d 11 (Fla. 2010) (Defines proper standard for competency to be executed under Florida law)
- Medina v. State, 690 So.2d 1255 (Fla. 1997) (Affirms record-based need for competent, substantial evidence)