Howell v. State
109 So. 3d 763
Fla.2013Background
- Howell, a death-sentenced prisoner, sought postconviction relief under Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.851 after earlier denials.
- Governor signed a death warrant Jan 18, 2013; execution set for Feb 26, 2013; scheduling order limited successive motions.
- Howell’s amended postconviction motion was summarily denied Feb 4, 2013; he appeals.
- Claims: (1) conflict-based removal of registry counsel; (2) denial of request for experts/investigators; (3) constitutionality of Florida’s capital-sentencing scheme.
- Court reviews and ultimately affirms denial of relief and denies a stay of execution.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conflict-based removal of registry counsel | Taylor may have conflict due to association with missed deadline; removal requested. | No abuse of discretion; Martinez/Fla. rule do not require removal; claims speculative and untimely. | No basis to remove registry counsel; no abuse of discretion. |
| Appointment of investigators and experts | Need mitigation and neuropsychological/forensic experts; time/limits require appointment. | No demonstrated need; statutory caps and lack of viable non-procedurally barred claims. | No abuse of discretion; motions properly denied. |
| Lethal injection/mitigation of capital scheme | Lethal injection protocol unconstitutional; requests evidentiary hearing based on medical/history factors. | No new evidence; protocol already considered; as-applied claims lack colorable basis. | No entitlement to relief; lethal injection claim rejected on record. |
| Overall constitutionality of Florida’s capital sentencing scheme | Direct challenge to death-penalty framework under evolving standards (Ring/Apprendi). | Court precedent upholds scheme; no merit to new substantive challenge. | 3.851 motion properly denied; scheme deemed constitutional as applied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Martinez v. Crosby, 132 S. Ct. 1309 (2012) (Martinez narrow exception for initial-review collateral proceedings)
- Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722 (1991) (attorney negligence cannot excuse procedural default)
- Gore v. State, 24 So.3d 1 (Fla.2009) (ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel claims not cognizable)
- Gore v. State, 91 So.3d 769 (Fla.2012) (Martinez analysis; state courts do not create independent claims via collateral counsel error)
- Pardo v. State, 108 So.3d 558 (Fla.2012) (Eighth Amendment lethal-injection framework; standard for relief)
- Weaver v. State, 894 So.2d 178 (Fla.2004) (standard for withdrawal/discharge of counsel; abuse of discretion analysis)