Kayle Barrington Bates v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 17250

Bates murdered Janet White in 1982, attacked in her office and then in a wooded area; survivor sustained fatal stab wounds.
Jury convicted Bates of first-degree murder, kidnapping, armed robbery, and attempted sexual battery; death sentence for murder and concurrent life terms for others.
Trial included opening prayer by victim’s minister before voir dire; jury later heard testimony that the victim’s funeral was at the minister’s church.
Bates challenged the prayer and later raised ineffective assistance claims; he also raised due process challenges to parole-ineligibility instruction at resentencing.
Florida law changed in 1994 to make life without parole the default other than death; Bates sought retroactive application and waiver of parole rights, which the trial and appellate courts denied.
Federal habeas petition was denied; appeal granted COA on two issues: ineffective assistance for not objecting to the prayer and Simmons-based parole-ineligibility instruction at resentencing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance for failure to object to opening prayer	Bates claims counsel should have objected to prayer affecting fairness.	Counsel’s decision was strategic; no clear prejudice shown.	No relief; Florida court’s Strickland decision not unreasonable.
Parole-ineligibility instruction at resentencing (Simmons)	Due process required informing parole ineligibility given Bates’s circumstances.	State law did not conclusively render Bates ineligible for parole; Simmons not controlling here.	No relief; Simmons/Ramdass distinctions supported by AEDPA deferential review.
Retroactivity/ex post facto waiver regarding new § 775.082	Bates waived ex post facto rights to apply the 1994 amendment.	Statutory retroactivity requires clear legislative intent; amendment not retroactive.	No relief; state court correctly held no retroactive application and waiver invalid.
Admission of other consecutive sentences as mitigation	Evidence of other sentences should mitigate due to overall punishment impact.	Evidence would mislead or distract; not proper mitigation.	No relief; Florida court’s exclusion of this evidence not contrary to Simmons.
Strickland prejudice and trial strategy in objecting	Professional judgment requires timely objection to prejudicial conduct.	Strategic decisions and contemporaneous-objection constraints justify restraint.	No relief; record supports that counsel's decisions were reasonable under Strickland.

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (ineffective assistance requires deficient performance and prejudice)
Simmons v. South Carolina, 512 U.S. 154 (1994) (parole-ineligibility instructions may be required when parole ineligibility is at issue)
Ramdass v. Angelone, 530 U.S. 156 (2000) (parole-ineligibility instruction is not required where parole is not conclusively barred)
Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (2011) (AEDPA deference limits review of state-court merits determinations)
Booker v. Secretary, Fla. Dept. of Corrections, 684 F.3d 1121 (2012) (affirmed that Simmons-era claims not independently controlling under AEDPA)
Lockett v. Ohio, 438 U.S. 586 (1978) (mitigating factors must be considered in capital sentencing)