Henry v. State
125 So. 3d 745
Fla.2013Background
- Henry was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder and sentenced to death after a 1987 Deerfield Beach store killings.
- Direct appeal affirmed both convictions and the death sentences; on remand the court addressed issues from Espinosa v. Florida and Sochor v. Florida.
- In postconviction proceedings, Henry raised numerous claims; an evidentiary hearing was held and most claims denied in 2003.
- On appeal, this Court affirmed the postconviction denial and rejected claims about ineffective assistance for drug-addiction mitigation strategy.
- Henry later pursued a successive postconviction claim arguing ASAM 2011 policy statement redefines addiction as a brain disorder, seeking life-sentence relief.
- This case asks whether ASAM’s definition constitutes newly discovered evidence and would likely yield a life sentence on retrial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the ASAM 2011 definition newly discovered evidence? | Henry argues ASAM redefinition is newly discovered evidence. | State contends ASAM is a new opinion/compilation not newly discovered. | Not newly discovered evidence. |
| Would ASAM evidence probably yield a life sentence on retrial? | ASAM would likely support mitigation and reduce sentence to life. | Even with mitigation, strong aggravators make life unlikely. | Even if admitted, would not probably yield life sentence. |
Key Cases Cited
- Schwab v. State, 969 So.2d 318 (Fla.2007) (new opinions or research studies not newly discovered evidence)
- Rutherford v. State, 940 So.2d 1112 (Fla.2006) (reports compiling existing information not newly discovered)
- Johnston v. State, 27 So.3d 11 (Fla.2010) (reports relying on existing publications not newly discovered)
- Jones v. State, 709 So.2d 512 (Fla.1998) (newly discovered evidence requires probable life-sentence impact in penalty phase)
- Wyatt v. State, 71 So.3d 86 (Fla.2011) (case-specific FBI letter not meeting second prong)
- Smith v. State, 75 So.3d 205 (Fla.2011) (FBI letter disavowal not retroactive; relevance to evidence)
- Gore v. State, 91 So.3d 769 (Fla.) (not newly discovered evidence where based on existing information)
- Johnston v. State, 27 So.3d 11 (Fla.2010) (addressing new opinions versus newly discovered evidence)