Long v. State
118 So. 3d 798
| Fla. | 2013Background
- Robert Long was arrested in 1984, confessed to multiple murders after waiving Miranda rights, and was later tried, pleaded, and sentenced in multiple counties.
- In Hillsborough County Long pleaded guilty (Sept. 23, 1985) to multiple counts under a plea agreement that reserved a full penalty-phase jury trial on the Michelle Denise Simms murder and waived challenges to his statements and certain physical evidence.
- Long twice moved to withdraw his guilty pleas; after a December 12, 1985 colloquy he elected not to withdraw and acknowledged understanding the plea’s terms (including the waiver).
- Long was initially sentenced to death in a related county; after appeal one death sentence was vacated and he was resentenced; a later penalty-phase jury unanimously recommended death and the trial court imposed death.
- Long filed a Rule 3.851 postconviction motion raising multiple claims, principally: ineffective assistance of counsel in advising the guilty plea (failure to explain waiver/ramifications and consider mental illness) and ineffective assistance for failing to object to alleged prosecutorial misconduct in the penalty phase.
- The circuit court denied relief (some after evidentiary hearing; others summarily); the Florida Supreme Court affirmed, finding the record supports that Long understood the plea and that counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to proper comments.
Issues
| Issue | Long's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel was ineffective in advising Long to plead guilty (failure to explain plea ramifications, including waiver of challenge to confession/evidence) | O’Connor failed to fully explain the plea’s consequences; Long would have proceeded to trial if properly advised | Colloquy, plea form, and prior testimony show counsel reviewed the plea and Long knowingly waived rights; no deficient performance | Denied — record contains competent substantial evidence Long understood the plea; no deficiency shown |
| Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to object to alleged prosecutorial misconduct during penalty phase | Prosecutor made improper comments that counsel should have objected to, undermining reliability of sentencing | The contested prosecutor comments were proper in context; counsel is not ineffective for failing to object to proper argument | Denied — claim waived on appeal for lack of specificity and, on the merits, no deficient performance or prejudice |
| Whether Long’s plea was lawfully entered / whether withdrawal should have been allowed | Plea was involuntary due to misunderstanding and mental illness; withdrawal warranted | Long twice affirmed understanding in open court; plea colloquies and counsel’s representations refute involuntariness | Denied — plea found voluntary and knowing; withdrawal not justified |
| Whether summary denial of claims was improper / entitlement to evidentiary hearing | Some claims required evidentiary development (mental-health/plea advice) | Court found record refuted claims or they were legally insufficient; evidentiary hearing provided where appropriate | Denied — where factual development was required the court held hearings; other claims were properly summarily denied as refuted or legally insufficient |
Key Cases Cited
- Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (1985) (two‑prong test for ineffective assistance in guilty‑plea context)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (deficiency and prejudice standard for ineffective assistance claims)
- Long v. State, 529 So.2d 286 (Fla. 1988) (prior appeal affirming convictions and remanding for new sentencing)
- Long v. State, 610 So.2d 1268 (Fla. 1992) (affirming resentencing and death sentence)
- Blanco v. State, 702 So.2d 1250 (Fla. 1997) (deference to trial court credibility findings)