legal news


Register | Forgot Password

David Eugene Johnston v. State Of Florida

David Eugene Johnston v. State Of Florida
06:20:2006


David Eugene Johnston v. State Of Florida



Supreme Court of Florida


____________


No. SC03-824


____________


DAVID EUGENE JOHNSTON,


Appellant,


vs.


STATE OF FLORIDA,


Appellee.



[May 4, 2006]



PER CURIAM.


David Eugene Johnston appeals an order of the circuit court denying a motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. For the reasons expressed below, we affirm both the trial court's denial of postconviction relief and its finding that Johnston is not mentally retarded.


FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND


Johnston was convicted of first-degree murder in the 1984 death of eighty-four-year-old Mary Hammond. Johnston was sentenced to death following a finding of three aggravating factors and no mitigating factors; his conviction and sentence were affirmed on Johnston's direct appeal in 1986. Johnston v. State, 497 So. 2d 863, 865 (Fla. 1986). The Governor signed a death warrant in 1988, and Johnston filed a motion for postconviction relief. The execution was stayed pending an evidentiary hearing, after which the trial court denied relief in its entirety. In 1991, this Court affirmed the trial court's denial of postconviction relief and denied Johnston's petition for writ of habeas corpus. Johnston v. Dugger, 583 So. 2d 657, 659 (Fla. 1991). Later, Johnston filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in federal district court, which was also denied. On appeal to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, the court declined to give Johnston habeas relief. Johnston v. Singletary, 162 F.3d 630, 632 (11th Cir. 1998). Following this Court's decision in Stephens v. State, 748 So. 2d 1028, 1033-34 (Fla. 1999), which clarified varying language used in ineffective assistance of counsel claims, Johnston filed another petition for writ of habeas corpus, arguing that Stephens should apply retroactively to his case. We denied that petition in Johnston v. Moore, 789 So. 2d 262, 263 (Fla. 2001).


In June 2002, Johnston filed a motion to vacate judgment of conviction and sentences, asserting that he is mentally retarded and that his execution would violate his constitutional rights. In August 2002, Johnston filed another postconviction motion challenging the constitutionality of his death sentence in response to the United States Supreme Court's decision in Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002), which held that the United States Supreme Court's decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), applies in the death penalty context. Without conducting an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied relief in its entirety in a written order dated January 31, 2003. After this Court relinquished jurisdiction pending appeal, the trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing and again denied relief. Johnston now appeals the trial court's denial of postconviction relief, and raises two claims for this Court's consideration.


ANALYSIS


Johnston raises the following claims in this appeal: (1) whether Florida's capital sentencing scheme is unconstitutional under the United States Supreme Court's decision in Ring, and (2) whether the trial court erred in finding that Johnston is not mentally retarded. [1]


Ring


Johnston's first claim is that Florida's capital sentencing scheme is unconstitutional under the United States Supreme Court's decision in Ring. We have recently held that even if Ring were to be applied in Florida, it would not be applied retroactively in postconviction claims. See Johnson v. State, 904 So. 2d 400, 412 (Fla. 2005). Hence, we affirm the trial court's denial of Johnston's Ring claim.


Mental Retardation


On June 24, 2005, the trial court held an evidentiary hearing to determine if Johnston meets the mental retardation criteria set out in Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.203.[2] Based upon the evidence received at the hearing, the trial court concluded that Johnston is not retarded. We now review that ruling and affirm the trial court's determination.


Prior to the evidentiary hearing, the trial court appointed Drs. Sal Blandino and Gregory A. Prichard to examine Johnston. Dr. Blandino, a licensed psychologist, examined Johnston at Union Correctional Institution on May 31, 2005. Dr. Blandino testified that mental retardation is a disorder classified in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual using a three-prong test. The first prong involves â€





Description A decision regarding motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851 in a case regarding first-degree murder .
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale