Paul Beasley Johnson v. State of Florida
205 So. 3d 1285
| Fla. | 2016Background
- In 1981 Paul Beasley Johnson was convicted of three first-degree murders; after retrials and postconviction litigation his death sentences were reinstated and later vacated once before; a new penalty phase was held in 2013.
- At the 2013 penalty phase a jury recommended death for each murder by votes of 11–1; the trial court weighed multiple statutory aggravators and numerous mitigating factors and imposed three death sentences.
- Johnson’s mitigation included brain damage, long-term severe drug abuse with drug-induced psychosis at the time of the crimes, traumatic prenatal and childhood history, low education, and post-offense remorse and good institutional behavior.
- Aggravators included prior violent felony, murders for pecuniary gain, murder of a law-enforcement officer, and that two murders were cold, calculated, and premeditated; the court assigned varying weights to each.
- Johnson argued his death sentences violate Ring and Hurst because the jury did not make the critical factual findings required by the Sixth Amendment; the State argued contemporaneous violent-felony convictions and statute-based remedies affect the relief.
- The Florida Supreme Court concluded the Hurst error was not harmless given the nonunanimous recommendation and substantial mitigation, vacated the death sentences, and remanded for a new penalty-phase proceeding.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Johnson) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Johnson’s death sentences violate Ring/Hurst because the jury did not make requisite findings | Jury recommendation (11–1) insufficient; Sixth Amendment requires jury find aggravating facts beyond reasonable doubt | Contemporaneous convictions and other record facts insulate the sentence; statutory remedies foreclose resentencing | Court: Yes—Hurst/Ring violation; jury did not make the necessary findings; error requires relief |
| Whether the Hurst error is subject to harmless-error review and, if so, whether it was harmless | Error undermined the reliability of the death sentences; relief required | Error can be harmless; State must prove harmless beyond a reasonable doubt | Harmless-error applies; State failed to show beyond a reasonable doubt that error did not contribute to sentence; not harmless |
| Whether section 775.082(2), Fla. Stat., mandates imposition of life sentences instead of resentencing when death is held unconstitutional | Remand unnecessary; statute requires judge to impose life if death unconstitutional | Remedy should be a new penalty proceeding rather than automatic life sentence | Court: Rejects automatic-life remedy under §775.082(2) and orders new penalty phase (majority) |
| Whether contemporaneous convictions for other violent felonies cure Hurst error | N/A (Johnson argues jury must find facts) | Contemporaneous convictions render findings redundant and preserve death sentence | Court: Rejected State’s contention; contemporaneous convictions do not cure Hurst error |
Key Cases Cited
- Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (U.S. 2016) (Sixth Amendment requires jury find facts necessary to impose death)
- Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002) (capital sentencing scheme delegating factual findings to judge violates Sixth Amendment)
- Hurst v. State, 202 So.3d 40 (Fla. 2016) (Florida decision applying Hurst, addressing harmless-error and remedies)
- Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 (1967) (harmless-error standard — state must show error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt)
- State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla. 1986) (application of harmless-error analysis in Florida criminal cases)