Seibert v. State, 64 So. 3d 67

Seibert was sentenced to death for first-degree murder after a 2003 trial in which the jury recommended death with two aggravators and six non-statutory mitigators.
Seibert filed a rule 3.851 postconviction motion asserting multiple claims including ineffective assistance of counsel, access to public records, and lethal-injection challenges; the circuit court summarily denied the motion.
The State cross-appealed seeking to compel disclosure of records related to lethal injection protocols; the court ordered production of certain records subject to in-camera sealing procedures.
At issue in the postconviction proceeding were claims arising from prior violent felonies, hearsay evidence during penalty, and alleged procedural deficiencies at trial and sentencing.
Seibert also pursued a habeas petition asserting various ineffective-assistance claims on appeal and related issues; the court denied the habeas petition and affirmed the public-records ruling.
Key underlying facts about the crime, including that Green and Adrianza were present with Seibert, extensive cocaine use, and the discovery of a severed foot in the bathtub, were recited from the direct-appeal opinion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance at suppression/guilt stage	Seibert contends counsel failed at suppression and guilt trial.	State argues issues were procedurally barred or refuted by record.	No reversible error; denial affirmed
Penalty-phase ineffective assistance	Seibert claims counsel was ineffective during penalty phase.	State asserts proper strategic decisions; Crawford timing not preserved.	Denial affirmed; no entitlement to relief
Lethal-injection challenge	Seibert argues Florida lethal-injection method unconstitutional.	Lightbourne and Diaz precedents undermine relief here.	Claim properly denied; procedural and substantive rulings affirmed
Public records access	Seibert asserts denial of access to public records under Rule 3.852.	Record shows compliance and proper sealing; rule reaffirmed by Florida Supreme Court.	Public records ruling affirmed
Other appellate-habeas issues and cumulative error	Seibert contends various appellate and cumulative-error claims warrant relief.	Court finds issues procedurally barred or meritless.	All such claims rejected

Seibert v. State, 923 So. 2d 460 (Fla.2006) (direct-appeal affirmance of conviction and sentence; sets basis for 3.851 context)
Lightbourne v. McCollum, 969 So. 2d 326 (Fla.2007) (upheld Florida lethal-injection procedure)
Diaz v. State, 945 So. 2d 1136 (Fla.2006) (Death-penalty protocols not per se unconstitutional for mental illness)
Peede v. State, 955 So. 2d 480 (Fla.2007) (counsels' failure to anticipate changes in law not deficient performance)
Israel v. State, 985 So. 2d 510 (Fla.2008) (upheld rule 4-3.5(d)(4) challenges; appellate failure not ineffective)
Groover v. Singletary, 656 So. 2d 424 (Fla.1995) (nonmeritorious issues cannot form basis for ineffective assistance)
Rolling v. State, 944 So. 2d 176 (Fla.2006) (ABA report cannot overturn facial constitutionality of death penalty)
Hoskins v. State, 965 So. 2d 1 (Fla.2007) (HAC instruction does not include an intent element)
Vining v. State, 827 So. 2d 201 (Fla.2002) (one-year rule 3.851 time limit constitutionality rejected)
Stano v. State, 473 So.2d 1282 (Fla.1985) (evidence admissibility in capital sentencing)