John F. Mosley v. State of Florida, 397 So.3d 1001

John F. Mosley was convicted of the 2004 first-degree murders of his infant son and the child’s mother; he was sentenced to death for the child's murder.
Mosley’s death sentence was vacated twice by the Florida Supreme Court due to procedural errors, most recently because the trial court failed to address his motion to represent himself at a Spencer hearing.
On remand, Mosley requested counsel for the new Spencer and sentencing hearings, and the trial court reimposed the death sentence.
Mosley appealed the new death sentence, raising two distinct procedural and substantive claims.
The underlying factual evidence regarding the murders and the autopsy testimony of Dr. Margarita Arruza had previously been litigated and formed part of his attempts to introduce newly discovered evidence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
"Reverse" Jury Nullification	Jury failed to consider mitigation properly in penalty phase	Issue was not raised in proper prior appeal	Procedurally barred; should have been appealed earlier
Newly Discovered Evidence (Dr. Arruza's Impairment)	Court erred by denying evidentiary hearing on examiner’s impairment	Issue untimely and outside remand scope	Untimely; even if timely, claim fails on merits

Mosley v. State, 349 So. 3d 861 (Fla. 2022) (addressing prior vacatur and remand of Mosley’s death sentence)
Spencer v. State, 615 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 1993) (procedure for capital sentencing hearings)
Farina v. State, 191 So. 3d 454 (Fla. 2016) (timing and treatment of newly discovered evidence claims)
Valentine v. State, 339 So. 3d 311 (Fla. 2022) (claims not raised on appeal are abandoned)
Sheppard v. State, 338 So. 3d 803 (Fla. 2022) (standards for newly discovered evidence claims)
Covington v. State, 348 So. 3d 456 (Fla. 2022) (procedural bar for claims not raised on direct appeal)