Marvin Cannon v. State of Florida
180 So. 3d 1023
| Fla. | 2015Background
- Cannon was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for Morgan’s killing, with McMillian as codefendant.
- Neel and Morgan, coworkers, traveled with Cannon to sell “deer corn” on December 24, 2010; Cannon directed the route and provided the knife.
- Morgan was killed in a remote, wooded location after Cannon directed the others there; Neel was stabbed by Cannon.
- A truck fire occurred after the stabbing, and investigators recovered a knife in a patrol car linked to the crime scene.
- The jury returned a death verdict; a Spencer hearing was held; Cannon was found guilty of arson and related counts; the trial court imposed a death sentence with multiple aggravators and limited mitigating factors.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Doubling of aggravators for prior violent felony and probation | Cannon argues the violent nature of the prior carjacking was used to weight both aggravators. | State asserts the two aggravators are distinct: one based on status (probation) and the other on prior conviction. | No improper doubling; factors are distinct and properly weighted. |
| Application of HAC aggravator to Cannon | Cannon contends HAC cannot apply if he did not direct the killing. | Cannon was the dominant actor who orchestrated the crime and initiated the murder. | HAC appropriately applied given Cannon’s dominant role and orchestration of the crime. |
| Jury instruction on attempted voluntary manslaughter | The court sua sponte modified the instruction and failed to reinstruct on justifiable/excusable homicide. | Error conceded; not fundamental; procedural bar applies due to lack of objection. | Claim procedurally barred; not fundamental error. |
| Admissibility of hearsay/confrontation issue | Mr. Neel’s testimony included hearsay statements about corn sale and other matters allegedly violating Crawford. | Statements were non-testimonial and harmless; not Confrontation Clause error. | Admissible; admission was harmless and not Crawford violation. |
| Sufficiency of the evidence for robbery, arson, and related counts | State’s circumstantial evidence proves robbery and arson. | Defendant disputes sufficiency for several counts; questions raised. | Robbery and arson affirmed; attempted robbery vacated; sufficient evidence supported convictions. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bright v. State, 90 So.3d 249 (Fla.2012) (guides weight assignment for prior violent felonies when duplicative)
- Green v. State, 641 So.2d 391 (Fla.1994) (improper doubling analysis for aggravators)
- Banks v. State, 700 So.2d 363 (Fla.1997) (separate aggravators may be used if distinct)
- Agan v. State, 445 So.2d 326 (Fla.1983) (aggravators must be separate and not restatements)
- Patrick v. State, 104 So.3d 1046 (Fla.2012) (doubling concerns where same offense referenced)
- Muhammad v. State, 494 So.2d 969 (Fla.1986) (prior violent felony vs. status at time of crime)
- Rose v. State, 787 So.2d 786 (Fla.2001) (double-counting prior felonies not error when distinct)
- Hildwin v. State, 727 So.2d 193 (Fla.1998) (prior conviction vs. status distinctions)
- Waterhouse v. State, 429 So.2d 301 (Fla.1983) (separate characteristics justify multiple aggravators)
- Lugo v. State, 845 So.2d 74 (Fla.2003) (HAC where leader/dominant actor)
- Cave v. State, 727 So.2d 227 (Fla.1998) (HAC based on ringleader actions)
- Copeland v. State, 457 So.2d 1012 (Fla.1984) (HAC upheld when defendant personally participated)
- Perez v. State, 919 So.2d 347 (Fla.2005) (HAC upheld in extreme stabbing cases)
- Francis v. State, 808 So.2d 110 (Fla.2001) (concerning consciousness during attack)
- Montgomery v. State, 39 So.3d 252 (Fla.2010) (relevant to jury instruction and error scope)
- Williams v. State, 123 So.3d 23 (Fla.2013) (fundamental error standard for attempted manslaughter instruction)
- Pena v. State, 901 So.2d 781 (Fla.2005) (excusable/justifiable homicide instruction not fundamental error)