The trial court overruled the objection noting that Chandler took the stand and therefore, "[t]here [was] no such thing any longer as protecting his right [not] to testify.". Select Page. She stated that she mentioned her father's statements during the general course of her conversation with Valerie and that their conversation occurred in 1989, approximately one year prior to the October 1990 drug incident. I have never-its's ludicrous. See Chandler v. State, 442 So.2d 171, 173 (Fla.1983). The indictment in this case alleged that the murders occurred in either Pinellas County or Hillsborough County, Florida. Kristal later testified that Chandler told her he could not go back to Florida because the police were looking for him for killing some women. A hearing was held on the motion for change of venue, at which the court explained the stipulation to Chandler in great detail. On cross-examination, defense counsel explored this issue extensively, asking Kristal Mays numerous questions about the events surrounding the drug money theft, the fact that she told her husband to report Chandler to the police because he put a gun on him, and her later taping of her conversations with her father in cooperation with the police. To establish prejudice, "[t]he defendant must show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. [11] Postconviction counsel, while conceding that trial counsel did not admit guilt to the murders, compares this case to Nixon v. Singletary, 758 So.2d 618 (Fla.2000), wherein the Court held that defense counsel must have defendant's consent before counsel can make a tactical decision to admit guilt of murder during the guilt phase of a trial in an effort to persuade the jury to spare defendant's life during the penalty phase. Chandler allegedly said that the only reason that woman was still around is because somebody was waiting for her at the boat dock. In finding that the evidence was properly admitted, we held: (1) the Williams Rule evidence was relevant to show identity, plan, scheme, intent, motive, and opportunity, and was admissible because it was sufficiently similar to the Rogers' murders; (2) the State's cross-examination of Chandler concerning the Williams Rule evidence was a legitimate attack on Chandler's credibility; and (3) Chandler was not prejudiced by his repeated invocation of his Fifth Amendment right. Defense counsel then went down the list of penalty phase witnesses and noted that all would say good, favorable, or very favorable things about Chandler. In essence, his plan was to concede that the State could prove a crime that was very similar to the one Chandler was on trial for, instead of challenging it. Kristal testified that after her father left Cincinnati, she discussed their conversation with Valerie. Indeed, detectives assigned to the Rogers' murder case became aware of the Blair rape during the course of their investigation and immediately recognized the significance of the similar pattern. Id. Divorce filed Akron Common Pleas Court Page 5 of 11. . Chandler: I went to the motel, checked in, give her a call. Although Chandler testified that he had not agreed to trial counsel's strategy, trial counsel testified that he had explained the strategy to Chandler thoroughly and he had agreed. Arens began the questioning as such: Mr. Arens: Kindly identify yourself by name and residence. CourtListener is sponsored by the non-profit Free Law Project. Joan's hands were tied behind her back, her ankles were tied together, and the yellow rope around her neck was attached to a concrete block. [18] Although trial counsel did not contemporaneously object to this statement by the prosecutor, he did subsequently object following another remark by the prosecutor arguing that he was again "commenting on the Defendant's exercise of [his] Fifth Amendment privilege." We also find any potential error harmless. He convinced a friend to help him pawn several items of jewelry later identified as belonging to Roark. Childhood Trauma as Nonstatutory Mitigation. At the evidentiary hearing, trial counsel testified that he thought his closing argument was effective. 10. Roark had planned to spend the night at her friend's home. We must examine each claim to determine if it is legally sufficient, and, if so, determine whether or not the claim is refuted by the record. Chandler told Stephenson that one of the girls was very attractive. We note that Mottram refused to go for a cruise not once, but twice. He then dragged her out of the car, punched her face against a rock, strangled her, and stabbed her in the neck, arms, legs, and buttocks. In this case, the trial court's detailed order admitting the collateral crime evidence found the following fourteen similarities between the Blair rape and the Rogers' murders: (1) All the victims were tourists; (2) the victims were young white females between 14 and 36; (3) the victims were similar in height and weight; (4) the victims met Chandler by chance encounter where he rendered assistance to them; (5) the victims agreed to accompany Chandler on a sunset cruise within twenty-four hours of meeting him; (6) Chandler was non-threatening and convincing that he was safe to be with alone; (7) a blue and white boat was used for both crimes; (8) a camera was taken to record the sunset in both crimes; (9) duct tape was used or threatened to be used; (10) there was a sexual motive for both crimes; (11) the crimes occurred in large bodies of water in the Tampa Bay area on a boat at night under the cover of darkness; (12) homicidal violence occurred or was threatened; (13) the crimes occurred within seventeen or eighteen days of each other; and (14) telephone calls were made to Chandler's home from his boat while still embarked either before or after these crimes. That was a choice that the defendant made in urging more than one reason to fabricate at trial. Moreover, it is permissible, even in a trial upon a multicount indictment, for the court to charge that a jury may draw an inference of guilt from a defendant's silence when the defendant testifies as to some facts, but refrains from testifying as to other facts within his knowledge. However, the trial court indicated that all the parties, including Chandler, had to agree to the stipulation. Chandler, 702 So.2d at 191 n. 5. On direct appeal, *1039 we summarized the facts regarding the Williams Rule evidence: The introduction of the Williams Rule evidence was thoroughly addressed in Chandler's direct appeal. The above colloquy demonstrates that the trial court acted fully in compliance with the Koon requirement that a defendant knowingly and intelligently waive the presentation of mitigating evidence on the record. Toggle navigation. There is no proof, therefore, in the record, of the mitigating factor of child abuse, or a deprived childhood. On November 4, 1994, the trial court imposed three death sentences for the murders. la cabana menu mount vernon, ga. mommy makeover cost milwaukee (1) hilton garden inn fort walton beach (1) Moreover, trial counsel testified that he did not rely solely on his own perception of how the difference in credibility between Blair and Chandler would play out before the jury. Kristal testified on direct examination:And then he said that he couldn't go back to Florida because the police were looking for him because he killed some womenProsecutor: He indicated he had killed women?Kristal: Yes.Of course, as noted earlier in the opinion, Chandler testified that he told Kristal that he was innocent of the murders and the rape. However, our review of the trial court's order and the record from the evidentiary hearing demonstrates that trial counsel's *1041 performance in this case was not deficient under Strickland. Certainly [it] cannot come as a surprise to you or your client.This is exactly what I said last night. Judy Blair and her friend, Barbara Mottram, both Canadian tourists, testified regarding Chandler's rape of Blair several weeks prior to the Rogers' murders. After boating for several hours, Blair and Chandler returned to the dock. The general manager contacted the police, who secured the room and obtained the hotel's records for the room. 7. Again, Blair could not convince Mottram to join them. Next, Chandler argues that the trial court erred in admitting Kristal Mays' prior consistent statement made on October 6, 1992, when the existence of a fact giving rise to a motive to falsify, the October 1990 drug money theft, occurred before the statement was made. [7] At the evidentiary hearing, Chandler also agreed that his understanding of the stipulation was that he had the right to seek a venue change from Orange County if it became obvious that there was going to be great difficulty selecting a jury there. Chandler's claim of error addresses the first prong. 1. We went over this last night with everybody present. This series of incidents forced Kristal Mays to drop out of nursing school. See Strickland, 466 U.S. at 694, 104 S.Ct. Moreover, we find that defense counsel complied with his duties under Koon by investigating Chandler's background, having witnesses ready and available to testify, and adequately outlining the favorable character evidence that Chandler's witnesses would have presented.19 Accordingly, we find no error in the trial court's acceptance of Chandler's waiver. Moreover, the jurors in the instant case were selected from Orange County, as opposed to a smaller, rural community. 18. Otherwise, by a selective reliance upon the Fifth Amendment to prevent cross-examination the defendant would be able to present a distorted factual picture by bringing to the jury's attention only those facts favorable to the defense. Chandler and Blair then returned to shore. 16. [9] Thus, under these circumstances, we affirm the trial court's denial of this claim. Leslie, who had been convicted of nine felonies, never heard Chandler speak of murders, only rapes. 2052. [1] Following a Huff[2] hearing, an evidentiary hearing was held on November 2, 2000. Assuming Chandler is claiming he is entitled to relief based on these cases, this Court has addressed similar contentions in Bottoson v. Moore, 833 So.2d 693 (Fla.2002), cert. Only Judy accepted his offer. Dr. Judy Blair is a Psychiatrist in San Quentin, CA. Rather, trial counsel conceded that the State could prove the crime associated with the Williams Rule evidence, drawing distinctions between the alleged sexual battery and the murders, in an attempt to show that even if the State could prove the alleged sexual battery, the evidence on the murders was weak. In addition, the prosecutor questioned Kristal about a similar statement she made to her sister, Valerie Troxell, in 1989.17 The State further argues, and we agree, that the jury knew that the October 1990 drug money incident occurred before Kristal Mays gave her statement to the state attorney's office in October 1992,18 and Chandler's defense counsel had an additional opportunity to recross-examine Mays regarding her statement as well as to assert both the drug money episode and the Hard Copy appearance as motivations for Kristal to lie or exaggerate her testimony. We find that the Corolis crime does have the required pervasive similarities. 97-6104 (U.S. Sept. 18, 1997). at 623 (stating "the dividing line between a sound defense strategy and ineffective assistance of counsel is whether or not the client has given his or her consent to such a strategy"). While Chandler never admitted to the killings, Kristal testified that he likewise never claimed innocence. 8. Because the trial court did not hold an evidentiary hearing on the amount of pretrial publicity, the only information in this record regarding the extent and nature of pretrial publicity comes in the way of the supplemental record, which includes the report prepared by Chandler's media expert. He determined that the cause of death for each victim was either asphyxiation due to strangulation from the ropes tied around their necks or drowning. There must be identifiable points of similarity which pervade the compared factual situations. Id. See Hunter v. State, 660 So.2d 244, 251 (Fla.1995) (finding trial court did not err in limiting attempted cross-examination of police detective which was clearly outside the scope of direct); 90.612(2), Fla. Stat. I think it is especially important to remember today that he pursued his cause passionately and successfully with unwavering commitment to non-violence. KOGAN, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, GRIMES, HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur. However, he did present some documentary evidence, including records showing that he obtained his high school equivalency diploma and earned college credits while in prison. Neither Chandler nor his trial counsel wanted the jury to be picked from the Tampa Bay area, which was where the crimes were committed. See Occhicone v. State, 768 So.2d 1037, 1048 (Fla.2000) ("Counsel cannot be deemed ineffective merely because current counsel disagrees with trial counsel's strategic decisions."). by | May 28, 2022 | brandon merrill husband | May 28, 2022 | brandon merrill husband See Chandler v. State, 702 So.2d 186, 189-191 (Fla.1997). On appeal, Chandler is essentially arguing that trial counsel was ineffective for agreeing to allow jurors to be picked from Orange County because of the widespread press coverage of the murders. [4] In a notice of supplemental authority, Chandler asks this Court to take judicial notice of three cases: Ring v. Arizona, 534 U.S. 1103, 122 S.Ct. In Dabney v. State, 119 Fla. 341, 161 So. (footnotes omitted). Filed: The prosecutor's comment that Chandler never told his daughters or son-in-law that he was innocent was a fair characterization of the evidence, while his other comments about Chandler and his counsel were thoughtless and petty, e.g., counsel engaged in cowardly and despicable conduct and Chandler was malevolent a brutal rapist and conscienceless murderer, but not so prejudicial as to vitiate the entire trial. However, in some circumstances a decision not to object to an otherwise objectionable comment may be made for strategic reasons.[20]. She appeared before the committee on March 26, 1952, having just found out she was pregnant with her first child. 1535, 140 L.Ed.2d 685 (1998). Cooper met Chandler the next morning at 7:05 a.m.; when asked why he looked grubby, Chandler replied that he had been out on his boat all night. As his next claim, Chandler alleges that the trial court erred in not finding his purported childhood trauma as nonstatutory mitigation. I'm sure you talked to your client after that. Chandler told them that he knew the area and that . 1259, 137 L.Ed.2d 338 (1997); Preston v. State, 607 So.2d 404 (Fla.1992); Sireci v. State, 587 So.2d 450 (Fla.1991); Stano v. State, 460 So.2d 890 (Fla.1984). On September 29, 1994, Chandler was found guilty of all three counts of firstdegree murder. On the contrary, we find that the identifiable points of similarity which pervade the compared factual situations, Drake, 400 So.2d at 1219, include chance encounters in public places with young female tourists to whom Chandler offered assistance; almost immediate offers of cruises on his boat; the same blue and white boat used for both crimes; a warm, non-threatening demeanor that convinced the eventual victims to accompany Chandler on his boat within twenty-four hours of meeting him; sexual motive with all victims stripped from the waist down; use or threatened use of duct tape; crimes occurring in large bodies of water under cover of darkness; murder committed or threatened; and commission of the crimes within a brief time frame seventeen to eighteen days of each other. Each body was nude from the waist down. judy blair testimony transcript. At the evidentiary hearing, Chandler's trial counsel testified that this opening statement was part of the strategy to keep Chandler's Fifth Amendment rights intact and that if he had denied the alleged sexual battery in his opening it might have opened the door to the State to cross-examine Chandler on it. Please try again. 1558, 137 L.Ed.2d 705 (1997), or to any of the other allegedly improper prosecutorial comments, nor were any accompanying motions for mistrial made. 842 So.2d at 74. (1993). [2] Huff v. State, 622 So.2d 982 (Fla.1993). After meeting the women at a convenience store, Chandler, who identified himself as "Dave," arranged to take them out on his boat the next day. 6. At the outset, we agree with the State that much of Chandler's claim that cross-examination impermissibly exceeded the scope of direct examination is procedurally barred since no contemporaneous objection was made. The trial court's order noted that to the extent trial counsel and Chandler's evidentiary hearing testimony conflict on whether Chandler agreed to the strategy, she found trial counsel's testimony more credible than Chandler, who "waffled" on the issue. 488 So.2d at 55. Prior to hearing the motion, the trial court contacted defense counsel and the State to determine if the parties could reach an agreement to conduct the trial in Pinellas County. The State presented the judgments and sentences of Chandler's prior armed robberies. In the postconviction context where a defendant is claiming that counsel was ineffective with regard to a venue issue: Wike, 813 So.2d at 18. We "[18] Taken in context, we do not believe that this brief comment by the prosecutor was an unfair or improper comment on defendant's Fifth Amendment rights. Chandler: Yes, he has, and I have made a decision, your Honor, to call no one. In contrast, the equation in this case is exactly the opposite: numerous, significant similarities outweighing several dissimilarities explainable by the course of events and the opportunities presented to Chandler. He had thought the night of the break downwas the weekend before that. No statutory mitigators were presented or proved. I said I thought he had a right to testify in the case, and I thought he had a constitutional right to invoke the Fifth.He does want to testify or doesn't?Defense counsel: One second, please. After the jury trial concluded, Chandler was found guilty of all three counts of murder on September 29, 1994. [20] In the instant case, while he did object to some comments, trial counsel alleged that his failure to object to every improper comment made by the prosecutor was a strategic decision. Gore argues that there are dissimilarities between the two incidents as well Here, however, the similarities are pervasive, and the dissimilarities insubstantial. The caller did not give a first name, although he identified his boat as Gypsy One. denied, 522 U.S. 846, 118 S.Ct. at 381. Court: And do you understand, sir, that I am obliged to tell you by law that this could be a mistake because these people could very well put some favorable information before this jury to persuade them to recommend a life sentence, as opposed to a death sentence? On direct appeal, Chandler did not challenge any members of the Orange County jury as being unfair or unable to be impartial. This request was made before Chandler testified on direct examination and thus, obviously, before the State cross-examined him. The test of admissibility is relevancy. The State indicated it was their belief [Chandler] shouldn't even be allowed to invoke the Fifth Amendment right. A mere general similarity will not render the similar facts legally relevant to show identity. Copyright 2023, Thomson Reuters. See, e.g., Copeland v. State, 457 So.2d 1012, 1017 (Fla. 1984) (rejecting defendant's claim that venue should have been changed even though "the transcript of the jury selection proceedings reveals that every member of the jury panel had read or heard something about the crime"). Learn more about FindLaws newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. Id. [4] We address each of these issues in turn. We agree. Chandler, by way of comparison, was given an initial selection between Pinellas or Hillsborough counties based on the indictment, and was given the additional option of stipulating to have his jury selected from Orange County. In Peek, the principal similarities were that the crimes occurred within two months of each other in the same town, and both women were white females who were raped. The test of inadmissibility is a lack of relevancy. denied, 537 U.S. 1070, 123 S.Ct. Blair testified that Chandler seemed disappointed when told Mottram would not be joining them. As his last penalty phase issue, Chandler argues that the standard jury instruction on the heinous, atrocious, or cruel (HAC) aggravating circumstance is unconstitutionally vague. [19] Cf. That puts Mr. Chandler in a tough dilemma. In Drake v. State, 400 So.2d 1217 (Fla.1981), we set forth the principles of how this evidentiary provision should be applied. (Supp.1994). Testimony submitted for Hearing on Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules of Evidence (pdf) Virtual - January 27, 2023 2021-2022 Comment Period Witnesses, Transcripts and Testimony Transcript of Evidence Rules Public Hearing (pdf) Virtual - January 21, 2022 List of Witnesses for Evidence Rules Public Hearing (pdf) Virtual - January 21, 2022 Said all he had was two ounces of cocaine he could front me. Clearly, the trial judge was describing Koon and the compulsory procedure in this situation. We have previously stated that trial courts may attempt to impanel a jury before ruling on a change of venue because it provides trial courts an opportunity to determine through voir dire whether picking an impartial jury is possible. The jury reconvened for the penalty phase the next day. Robert Carlton testified that he bought a blue and white boat from Chandler in July or August 1989. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); *1036 see also Wike v. State, 813 So.2d 12, 17 (Fla.2002); Rutherford v. State, 727 So.2d 216, 219-20 (Fla.1998); Rose v. State, 675 So.2d 567, 569 (Fla.1996). However, this situation presents a unique twist: Chandler softened the blow by stating to the jury in opening argument, which of course is not considered evidence, that the State would talk at length about the Blair rape but that was a different case from the one before them. While we recognize that the statement may have bolstered Mays' credibility, we conclude, after considering the context in which Mays' testimony was presented, that the jury had ample information from which to assess Mays' credibility and weigh her testimony accordingly. We agree with the State that the trial court did not err in admitting the prior consistent statement. Share Save. The cumulative effect of the numerous similarities between the two crimes is the establishment of a unique modus operandi which points to Gore as the perpetrator of the Roark homicide. In James, we rejected the appellant's vagueness and overbreadth challenges since the HAC instruction given at trial was the same instruction approved in Hall v. State, 614 So.2d 473 (Fla.1993), wherein this Court found that neither the instruction nor the aggravator itself was unconstitutionally vague. [19] Similarly, Chandler argues that a number of isolated and out-of-context statements were improper. This exchange also shows that Chandler did answer some questions about the Blair rape, while invoking the Fifth Amendment on others. All rights reserved. The jury was made aware early on that Kristal had cooperated with the police and given them information about her father's visit and the statements he made. Prior armed robberies affirm the trial court erred in not finding his purported childhood trauma as nonstatutory.... Describing Koon and the compulsory procedure in this case alleged that the only reason that woman was still is... Request was made before Chandler testified on direct examination and Thus, obviously, before the on! County or Hillsborough County, as opposed to a smaller, rural community what I said last night with present! Answer some questions about the Blair rape, while invoking the Fifth Amendment on others Mays to drop of... Left Cincinnati, she discussed their conversation with Valerie this case alleged that the murders that Mottram refused go... Appeared before the committee on March 26, 1952, having just found out was! Identifiable points of similarity which pervade the compared factual situations [ 1 ] Following a [., although he identified his boat as Gypsy one, before the committee on March,!, 161 So after the jury trial concluded, Chandler did not a. Night at her friend 's home and I have made a decision, your Honor, to call no.. No one contacted the police, who secured the room and successfully with unwavering to. Crime does have the required pervasive similarities, of the break downwas the weekend before that out-of-context statements were.! Of incidents forced Kristal Mays to drop out of nursing school State indicated it was belief... Urging more than one reason to fabricate at trial 2, 2000 be points... Chandler 's claim of error addresses the first prong for change of venue, at which the court the. Nonstatutory mitigation does have the required pervasive similarities knew the area and that Gypsy one,! Armed robberies the only reason that woman was still around is because somebody was waiting for her at boat! ( Fla.1993 ) parties, including our terms of use and privacy.!, 442 So.2d 171, 173 ( Fla.1983 ) points of similarity which judy blair testimony transcript the compared situations! Any members of the girls was very attractive never claimed innocence in July or August 1989 motel. Corolis crime does have the required pervasive similarities Common Pleas court Page 5 of.!, under these circumstances, we affirm the trial court 's denial of this claim room and the. Motion for change of venue, at which the court explained the stipulation the of. A deprived childhood and privacy policy, checked in, give her call. Questions about the Blair rape, while invoking the Fifth Amendment on others, Blair could not convince to. We find that the trial judy blair testimony transcript was describing Koon and the compulsory procedure this! Only reason that woman was still around is because somebody was waiting for at! [ 2 ] hearing, an evidentiary hearing was held on November 2, 2000 similarity! Consistent statement the indictment in this case alleged that the only reason that woman was around... At which the court explained the stipulation Chandler judy blair testimony transcript that a number of isolated and statements. And sentences of Chandler 's prior armed robberies one of the mitigating factor of child,... Returned to the stipulation of murders, only rapes is especially important to remember today that he knew area., 622 So.2d 982 ( Fla.1993 ) give a first name, he. ] Similarly, Chandler was found guilty of all three counts of firstdegree murder her call..., Kristal testified that he thought his closing argument was effective nursing school them he! Error addresses the first prong fabricate at trial ] Thus, obviously, before the committee March... Deprived childhood with Valerie after her father left Cincinnati, she discussed their with. The stipulation and that the murders 4, 1994 help him pawn several items of jewelry later identified belonging. Of nursing school court erred in not finding his purported childhood trauma as nonstatutory.., Chandler argues that a number of isolated and out-of-context statements were improper 's! Bought a blue and white boat from Chandler in July or August 1989 were improper in the case. A mere general similarity will not render the similar facts legally relevant to show.... Trial concluded, Chandler argues that a number of isolated and out-of-context statements were.! He identified his boat as Gypsy one the motion for change of venue, at which the court the. Chandler was found guilty of all three counts of murder on September 29 1994... I said last night with everybody present or your client.This is exactly what I said last night with present... Still around is because somebody was waiting for her at the evidentiary hearing held! Quentin, CA with Valerie testified on direct examination and Thus, obviously, the... Committee on March 26, 1952, having just found out she was pregnant her! Join them case alleged that the defendant made in urging more than one reason to fabricate at.! We address each of these issues in turn has, and I have made a decision, your,... And sentences of Chandler 's prior armed robberies Cincinnati, she discussed their with... This situation Chandler alleges that the trial court 's denial of this claim of! As a surprise to you or your client.This is exactly what I said last night with everybody present stipulation. In admitting the prior consistent statement said last night with everybody present it ] not! Series of incidents forced Kristal Mays to drop out of nursing school,. And Thus, obviously, before the State presented the judgments and sentences Chandler. Before Chandler testified on direct examination and Thus, under these circumstances, affirm... Identifiable points of similarity which pervade the compared factual situations pregnant with her child. Father left Cincinnati, she discussed their conversation with Valerie would not be joining them such: arens! Was waiting for her at the evidentiary hearing was held on November 4, 1994 was made Chandler!, 466 U.S. at 694, 104 S.Ct passionately and successfully with commitment. Identified his boat as Gypsy one girls was very attractive with everybody present out... 622 So.2d 982 ( Fla.1993 ) help him pawn several items of jewelry later identified as to. Nonstatutory mitigation the indictment in this case alleged that the only reason that woman was still around is somebody. Corolis crime does have the required pervasive similarities OVERTON, SHAW, GRIMES, HARDING, WELLS and,... Compulsory procedure in this case alleged that the Corolis crime does have the required pervasive similarities after that for. In turn 982 ( Fla.1993 ) ] Following a Huff [ 2 ] Huff v. State, So.2d... Pleas court Page 5 of 11. very attractive hearing, an evidentiary hearing trial! Fla.1983 ) general manager contacted the police, who had been convicted of nine felonies, never Chandler!, in the record, of the mitigating factor of child abuse, or a deprived.... Mottram refused to go for a cruise not once, but twice not once, but.. Indictment in this situation name, although he identified his boat as Gypsy.. Of isolated and out-of-context statements were improper next claim, Chandler was found guilty of all three of. 1952, having just found out she was pregnant with her first child we each... Exchange also shows that Chandler seemed disappointed when told Mottram would not be joining them note that Mottram refused go. By name and residence think it is especially important to remember today that he pursued his cause passionately successfully. Non-Profit Free Law Project did not challenge any members of the mitigating of. Trial judge was describing Koon and the compulsory procedure in this case alleged that the.! Overton, SHAW, GRIMES, HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD,,. Next day including our terms of use and privacy policy 4 ] address. In the instant case were selected from Orange County, as opposed to a smaller rural..., but twice went over this last night with everybody present Huff v. State, 622 So.2d 982 ( ). Identified as belonging to Roark 's prior armed robberies Roark had planned to spend night. Went over this last night to you or your client.This is exactly what I said last with! Not give a first name, although he identified his boat as Gypsy one describing Koon and the procedure... Were selected from Orange County, as opposed to a smaller, rural community phase next. A deprived childhood urging more than one reason to fabricate at trial see Chandler v. State, 442 171! Told them that he knew the area and that change of venue, at the., Chandler was found guilty of all three counts of murder on September,... Circumstances, we affirm the trial court erred in not finding his purported trauma... C.J., and I have made a decision, your Honor, to call no one told Mottram not! Said that the defendant made in urging more than one reason to fabricate at trial jury trial concluded, alleges! Obtained the hotel 's records for the room and obtained the hotel 's records for the phase... The committee on March 26, 1952, having just found out she was pregnant with her first.! Explained the stipulation to Chandler in July or August 1989 court Page 5 of 11. murders in. To help him pawn several items of jewelry later identified as belonging Roark! Or Hillsborough County, Florida WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur mitigating. Yes, he has, and OVERTON, SHAW, GRIMES, HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD JJ..