McCoy v. State
113 So. 3d 751
Fla.2013Background
- McCoy was convicted of first‑degree murder and sentenced to death after a jury recommended death 7–5.
- McCoy filed a postconviction motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851 challenging trial counsel’s effectiveness.
- The postconviction court held an evidentiary Huff hearing and denied all claims.
- The direct appeal record showed strong circumstantial and direct evidence including fingerprints, surveillance video, and a recorded confession sequence.
- The postconviction claims spanned alibi witnesses, evidentiary issues, witness impeachment, alleged religious bias, and Ring/voting-structure challenges, all rejected on the merits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance—alibi witnesses | McCoy (McCoy) claims mother and Diana Peterson would have impeached Marcel | State contends no prejudice; testimonies would not undermine Marcel's credibility | No reversible error; lack of prejudice |
| Ineffective assistance—religious references | McCoy argues trial counsel should have objected to religious references | No reversible error; objection would harm defense; no prejudice shown | Claim fails |
| Concession that robbery occurred | Trial counsel conceded robbery to maintain credibility | Strategic decision; credible defense strategy | Not ineffective; strategic choice supported |
| Impeachment of Zsa Zsa Marcel; failure to present Marcel and Lee’s Chicken witnesses | Defense failed to present witnesses who could impeach or identify bias | Counsel acted strategically; insufficient prejudice shown | Not entitled to relief; no prejudice established |
| Ring/constitutional challenge to Florida’s capital scheme | Death penalty scheme violates Ring requirements | Direct‑appeal ruling controls; not meritorious; law upheld | Procedurally barred and meritless; scheme valid |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (establishes two-prong ineffective assistance standard)
- Bradley v. State, 33 So.3d 664 (Fla. 2010) (Strickland prejudice and standard applied; mixed review)
- Occhicone v. State, 768 So.2d 1037 (Fla. 2000) (strategic decisions in counsel’s conduct not ineffective)
- Belcher v. State, 961 So.2d 239 (Fla. 2007) (conceding death or witness tactics may be strategic)
- Johnson v. State, 903 So.2d 888 (Fla. 2005) (venire issues; bias considerations in voir dire)