Wilcox v. State, 143 So. 3d 359

Background

Wilcox was convicted of one count of first-degree murder, four counts of armed kidnapping, and one count of armed robbery, and sentenced to death.
The crimes occurred in Broward County, Florida, involving Johnson and four women held at Johnson’s townhouse.
Evidence included a 9mm handgun, a bandana, a jacket, and DNA/fingerprint links tying Wilcox to the Tahoe and crime scene.
Wilcox represented himself at trial and presented limited mitigation through his mother; the defense emphasized his upbringing and potential mental health factors.
The State presented eyewitnesses and forensic evidence; the defense presented alibi-ish testimony and challenged prior-record impeachment,

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Impeachment with prior convictions allowed?	Wilcox argues improper use of his prior record.	State contends proper impeachment under 90.610; Wilcox was evasive.	No reversible error; impeachment permissible, but some questions improper.
Discovery violation for Richaunda’s statements	Wilcox claims failure to transcribe a recorded statement hindered defense.	State argues no violation and Wilcox knowingly accepted DVD access limits.	No reversible discovery violation; trial court's ruling upheld.
Recollection refreshed using another witness’s statement	Wilcox sought refreshing via Jean’s statements to refresh Curry’s memory.	Court barred use of third-party statements as refreshers.	Error in barring refreshment; harmless given no connection to murder evidence.
Right to compulsory process	Wilcox claims denial of subpoena power and State-notification omission violated rights.	Wilcox chose self-representation; trial court properly admonished and assisted.	No violation; right to compulsory process depends on defendant’s initiative.
Avoid arrest aggravating circumstance (CCP)	Trial court correctly found avoid-arrest motive.	No clear dominant motive to avoid arrest; motive shown was protecting family.	Strike avoid-arrest aggravator; still death sentence affirmed on other factors.
Ring challenge to Florida’s death penalty scheme	Ring requires jury unanimity for aggravators and penalty.	Florida scheme intact; prior violent felony supports upholding.	Denied; Ring does not render statute unconstitutional here.

Key Cases Cited

Fotopoulos v. State, 608 So.2d 784 (Fla.1992) (impeachment of a testifying defendant with prior convictions allowed to negate false impressions)
Jackson v. State, 25 So.3d 518 (Fla.2009) (limits on impeachment to number of convictions unless witness answers untruthfully)
Behr v. Bell, 665 So.2d 1055 (Fla.1996) (discovery and disclosure rules; duty to disclose statements and content limitations)
Traff icante v. State, 92 So.2d 811 (Fla.1957) (compulsory process and witness transcripts context; distinction from this case)
Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (U.S. 1975) (right to self-representation and its procedural consequences)
Trafficante v. State, 92 So.2d 811 (Fla.1957) (constitutional right to compulsory process; defendant initiative required)