Joshua D. Nelson v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections
671 F. App'x 770
11th Cir.2016Background
- Nelson and co-defendant Keith Brennan planned and carried out the murder of Tommy Owens during a scheme to steal his car; Owens was beaten with a bat, tied, and stabbed, and later died.
- After the murder the defendants fled with two passengers, Tina and Misty Porth, who were told at times that Nelson and Brennan had killed Owens; both Porths testified at trial about those statements.
- Nelson gave a voluntary, video- and audio-recorded confession at the crime scene describing the murder in detail; physical evidence (blood on shoes, box cutter, and underwear) matched Owens’ DNA.
- At trial Nelson was convicted of first-degree murder and robbery; jury recommended death and the trial court imposed the death penalty; conviction and sentence affirmed on direct appeal by the Florida Supreme Court.
- Nelson filed a federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 claiming his Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause rights were violated by admission of Brennan’s out-of-court statements through Tina and Misty Porth; the district court denied relief but granted a COA on the confrontation issue.
- The Eleventh Circuit affirmed, concluding any Confrontation Clause error in admitting Brennan’s statements was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt under Brecht in light of overwhelming other evidence, especially Nelson’s taped confession.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether admission of Brennan’s out-of-court statements via Porth testimony violated Nelson’s Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause rights | Admission of Brennan’s statements deprived Nelson of the right to confront a testimonial witness against him | Any Confrontation Clause error was harmless because of overwhelming independent evidence of guilt | Any error was harmless under Brecht given Nelson’s detailed voluntary videotaped confession and corroborating physical and eyewitness evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Nelson v. State, 748 So. 2d 237 (Fla. 1999) (describing trial evidence and affirming conviction and sentence)
- Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619 (harmless-error standard for habeas review requires evaluating whether error had a substantial and injurious effect on the verdict)
- O’Neal v. McAninch, 513 U.S. 432 (clarifies standard for "grave doubt" and reviewing prejudice under harmless-error analysis)