Hilton v. State, 117 So. 3d 742

Cheryl Dunlap disappeared December 1, 2007 in Leon County, Florida and her body was found December 15, 2007 in the Apalachicola National Forest, with dismemberment indicating postmortem acts.
Gary Hilton, seen in the area and previously convicted in Georgia for a similar crime, was charged with Dunlap’s kidnapping and murder and indicted February 28, 2008.
Hilton was tried by a jury beginning February 2, 2011; the jury unanimously recommended the death penalty after penalty phase evidence.
The trial court sentenced Hilton to death, finding six aggravating factors, one statutory mitigating factor, and eight non-statutory mitigating factors; collateral evidence and pretrial statements were introduced at trial.
On appeal, the Florida Supreme Court upheld Hilton’s convictions and death sentence, affirming the aggravators, mitigation, proportionality, and sufficiency of the evidence.
Key evidentiary issues included the admissibility of Hilton’s statements during transport as collateral crime evidence, and the admissibility of Dr. Prichard’s penalty-phase testimony.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Collateral crime evidence admissibility	Hilton argues statements are Williams rule collateral crime evidence.	State contends statements are relevant to premeditation and not merely propensity.	Statements admitted were admissible to prove premeditation.
Admission of Dr. Prichard testimony	Hilton contends testimony improperly framed nonstatutory aggravation.	State argues testimony rebutted defense and opened door to rebuttal.	Testimony properly admitted as rebuttal, not as nonstatutory aggravation.
Witness sequestration	Hilton challenges Dr. Prichard’s presence under sequestration rules.	State asserts sequestration exception justified.	Trial court did not abuse discretion; Dr. Prichard remained in courtroom.
HAC and CCP aggravators	Hilton argues insufficiency to support HAC and CCP.	State asserts substantial evidence supports both aggravators.	Competent substantial evidence supports HAC and CCP.
Mitigation and capacity factor	Lack of capacity mitigator argued; court rejected it.	Weight given to experts favored by the State; defense mitigation rejected.	Court properly weighed and rejected lack of capacity mitigation; no relief granted.

McGirth v. State, 48 So.3d 777 (Fla. 2010) (defines admissibility of Williams rule evidence and related standards)
Durousseau v. State, 55 So.3d 543 (Fla. 2010) (limits on collateral evidence in penalty phase)
Perry v. State, 801 So.2d 78 (Fla. 2001) (anticipant rebuttal; limits on opening door to prior acts)
Hildwin v. State, 531 So.2d 124 (Fla. 1988) (penalty phase evidentiary standard emphasis)
Brown v. State, 721 So.2d 274 (Fla. 1998) (CCP focuses on state of mind, not merely conduct)
McWatters, 36 So.3d 640 (Fla. 2003) (CCP framework and circumstantial proof guidance)
Spencer v. State, 615 So.2d 688 (Fla. 1993) (witness sequestration and evidentiary rulings)
Williams v. State, 110 So.2d 654 (Fla. 1959) (early Williams rule authority)