& SC14-2278 Charles Grover Brant v. State of Florida and Charles Grover Brant v. Julie L. Jones, etc.
197 So. 3d 1051
Fla.2016Background
- In July 2004 Charles Grover Brant confessed to the sexual battery and murder (strangulation/suffocation) of Sara Radfar; physical evidence and items from the victim’s home were found in Brant’s trash.
- In May 2007 Brant pleaded guilty to first-degree murder and related offenses; he waived a jury for sentencing after a failed attempt to seat a penalty-phase jury.
- At penalty phase the defense presented extensive mitigation: history of substance abuse (methamphetamine dependence and psychosis), sexual obsessive disorder, childhood abuse, neuropsychological testing (PET scan showing hypometabolism), and lay testimony of remorse and nonviolence.
- The trial court found two aggravators (heinous, atrocious, or cruel (HAC) and commission during sexual battery) and multiple mitigators, and imposed death; this Court affirmed on direct appeal.
- Brant filed a Rule 3.851 motion raising seven claims (ineffective assistance at guilt and penalty phases, jury-selection failures, withheld CI information, competency-to-be-executed issues, and others). An evidentiary hearing was held; the postconviction court denied relief and Brant petitioned for habeas relief.
- This Court affirmed denial of postconviction relief and denied the habeas petition; it also rejected Hurst-based relief because Brant waived a jury recommendation at sentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| IAC — advice to plead guilty (no jury expert) | Brant: counsel failed to consult a jury expert or research jury decision-making; would have gone to trial but for that failure | State: counsel were experienced, considered options, advised plea to limit jury exposure to the damaging confession; Brant chose plea | No deficient performance or prejudice; plea was voluntary and beneficial (mitigating weight) |
| IAC — penalty-phase mitigation investigation (conception by rape, meth expert, prison expert, PET images, background) | Brant: counsel failed to discover/convey key mitigating facts and present specialized experts/evidence | State: counsel performed reasonable investigation; presented experts on meth use and PET results; many suggested experts/evidence would be cumulative | No deficient performance or prejudice; trial counsel’s strategy reasonable and mitigators were presented and weighed |
| IAC — failure to present prison-adjustment expert | Brant: expert testimony would show good adjustment and reduce risk, supporting life sentence | State: lay and documentary evidence already showed nonviolence and trustee status; little added value from an expert | No deficient performance or prejudice; evidence would be cumulative and HAC aggravator remains weighty |
| Brady — nondisclosure that half-brother was a confidential informant | Brant: State withheld CI status of half-brother (Garett) which was material | State: records and CI testimony showed Garett became a CI in 2006; defense knew Garett’s statements; not material | Denied — postconviction court credited records that Garett was not a CI in 2004; even if he were, Brant knew the facts and no material Brady violation shown |
| Ineffective appellate counsel / habeas — proportionality review & kidnapping motion denial | Brant: appellate counsel failed to argue proportionality/equal protection and erroneous denial of motion to dismiss kidnapping charge | State: proportionality review legitimately compares capital cases; Bedford controls kidnapping standard for subsection charged | Denied — issues were meritless: proportionality claim rejected by precedent; motion denial was correct under Bedford; appellate counsel not ineffective |
| Hurst claim after waiver of penalty jury | Brant: Hurst requires jury findings for death; applied retroactively to his case | State: Brant waived jury recommendation at penalty phase | Denied — waiver of jury precludes Hurst relief (defendant cannot benefit from waiving right and later assert Hurst) |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two-prong ineffective assistance of counsel test)
- Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (prejudice standard for ineffective assistance claims attacking guilty plea)
- Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510 (benchmarks reasonable mitigation investigation under Strickland)
- Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (Sixth Amendment requires jury finding of facts necessary to impose death)
- Brant v. State, 21 So. 3d 1276 (Fla. 2009) (Brant’s direct-appeal opinion affirming convictions and sentence)
- Bedford v. State, 589 So. 2d 245 (Fla. 1991) (kidnapping elements analysis distinguishing statutory subsections)
- Tillman v. State, 591 So. 2d 167 (Fla. 1991) (explaining purpose of Florida proportionality review)