PEEDE vs. STATE OF FLORIDA
Supreme Court of Florida
____________
No. SC04-2094
____________
ROBERT IRA PEEDE,
Appellant,
vs.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
____________
No. SC05-1885
____________
ROBERT IRA PEEDE,
Petitioner,
vs.
JAMES R. MCDONOUGH, etc.,
Respondent.
[January 11, 2007]
PER CURIAM.
Robert Peede appeals the circuit court's denial of his postconviction motion to vacate his conviction of first-degree murder and sentence of death and petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), (9), Fla. Const. We affirm the trial court's denial of Peede's postconviction motion and deny the petition for writ of habeas corpus.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Peede was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for the killing of his wife. The essential facts are outlined in our opinion reviewing the denial of his first postconviction motion in Peede v. State, 748 So. 2d 253 (Fla. 1999) (Peede II):
The evidence at trial established that Peede returned to Miami to convince Darla [Peede's estranged wife] to go to North Carolina and serve as a decoy in an alleged scheme Peede had to kill his ex-wife and her boyfriend. Peede telephoned Darla and she agreed to pick him up at the airport. However, instead of returning to Darla's home as intended, they mistakenly got on the Florida Turnpike heading for Orlando. As they left the Miami area, Peede pulled a lock-blade knife and inflicted a superficial cut in Darla's side. Subsequently, outside of Orlando, Peede stopped the car, jumped into the back seat, and stabbed Darla in the throat. As a result of this injury, Darla bled to death. Peede was arrested in North Carolina before carrying out his scheme to murder his ex-wife, and he confessed to Darla's murder.
After his trial and conviction, a jury recommended the death penalty. The trial judge followed the jury's recommendation and sentenced Peede to death, finding three aggravating factors [n.2] and one mitigating circumstance. The trial court found in mitigation that Peede was under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance, but attributed little weight to this finding. On appeal, this Court affirmed Peede's conviction and, although we found that the murder was not cold, calculated and premeditated (CCP), we nevertheless upheld the death penalty. See Peede v. State, 474 So. 2d 808 (Fla. 1985).
[n.2] The three aggravating factors found by the trial court were: (1) previous conviction of two felony crimes involving the use of force or threat to another person; (2) murder committed during the commission of a kidnapping; and (3) murder committed in a cold, calculated and premeditated manner.
Peede II, 748 So. 2d at 254.
We upheld the conviction and sentence on direct appeal. See Peede v. State, 474 So. 2d 808, 809 (Fla. 1985) (Peede I), and the United States Supreme Court denied Peede's petition for writ of certiorari. Peede v. Florida, 477 U.S. 909 (1986). The governor then signed a death warrant, and Peede filed an emergency postconviction motion, raising fifteen issues.1 The trial court granted a stay of execution and thereafter scheduled an evidentiary hearing which never took place. Subsequently, Peede filed an amended motion, raising six additional issues.2
The trial court eventually denied all of Peede's claims without an evidentiary hearing even though the State conceded the need for an evidentiary hearing on certain claims and the court had scheduled one earlier. On appeal, this Court denied relief on some claims, but remanded for an evidentiary hearing on Peede's claim that he had not received any records pursuant to his request under chapter 119, Florida Statutes; Peede's Brady claims; some of Peede's claims involving ineffective assistance of counsel; and on Peede's claims â€
