Seburt Nelson Connor v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 6138
11th Cir.2013Background
- Connor, a Florida death-row inmate, filed a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his conviction and death sentence.
- District Court granted a certificate of appealability on competency-related issues and on penalty-phase effectiveness of counsel.
- Two pretrial competency hearings (1996 and 1998) found Connor competent to stand trial; later state postconviction hearings also found competency.
- Trial occurred in January 1998 with death sentence for Jessica Goodine’s murder and life for Lawrence Goodine’s murder; penalty phase included mental health mitigation.
- Connor pursued state postconviction relief; Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial of relief, including penalty-phase claims.
- In federal proceedings, Connor’s counsel sought competency evaluation, a neuropsychologist, and a stay; District Court denied these requests but allowed a neuropsychological assessment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court abused discretion denying a competency hearing and stay | Connor seeks a competency determination and stay under Gonzales | Court properly denied due to lack of statutory right and record-based claims | No abuse; district court within discretion |
| Whether funds for a neuropsychologist were warranted to assess competency | Competency requires expert assessment given mental illness history | No need; claims were record-based and unripe for further testing | No abuse; funds properly limited |
| Whether Connor received ineffective assistance of counsel during the penalty phase | Counsel failed to present certain mitigating evidence and experts | Florida Supreme Court reasonably applied Strickland and AEDPA | Affirmed; no Strickland prejudice established |
Key Cases Cited
- Gonzales v. Ryan, 133 S. Ct. 696 (2013) (no statutory right to competency in federal habeas; stay decisions reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269 (2005) (stay authority to avoid piecemeal litigation in capital cases; limits on stays)
- Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (2000) (Strickland standards applied to ineffective assistance claims)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (deficient performance and prejudice prong; highly deferential review)
- Harrington v. Richter, 131 S. Ct. 770 (2011) (AEDPA review is doubly deferential when Strickland is involved)
- Pinholster v. Supreme Court, 131 S. Ct. 1388 (2011) (limitations on evidentiary review in § 2254 petitions; record-based analysis)
- Rees v. Peyton, 384 U.S. 312 (1966) (historical basis for competency in capital proceedings; not controlling here)
- Panetti v. Quarterman, 551 U.S. 930 (2007) (execution competence considerations and Ford line of cases)