DOCSLIB.ORG

Docket No. ___In the Supreme Court of The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

DOCKET NO. _______ IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM, 2020 --------------------------------- ANTHONY JOHN PONTICELLI, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. --------------------------------- --------------------------------------- PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT --------------------------- MARTIN J. McCLAIN Florida Bar No. 0754773 Law Office of Martin J. McClain 141 N.E. 30th Street Wilton Manors, FL 33334 Telephone: (305) 984-8344 FAX: (954) 564-5412 [email protected] COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER QUESTIONS PRESENTED--CAPITAL CASE 1. Whether the Florida Supreme Court’s statutory construction in Hurst v. State constitutes substantive law, and if so, whether the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires that this substantive law govern the law in existence at the time of Mr. Ponticelli’s alleged offense? 2. Whether the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment permits State v. Poole to retroactively change Florida’s substantive law to Mr. Ponticelli’s detriment? 3. Whether McKinney v. Arizona governs the retroactivity of Hurst v. Florida and Hurst v. State as to Florida’s capital sentencing statute which is markedly different than Arizona’s statute? 4. Whether the Eighth Amendment requires a unanimous jury verdict on the elements required for a capital defendant to be sentenced to death? i NOTICE OF RELATED CASES Per Supreme Court Rule 14.1(b)(iii), the following cases relate to this petition: Underlying Trial: Circuit Court of Marion County, Florida State of Florida v. Anthony Ponticelli, Case No. 87-2719 CF Judgement Entered August 12, 1988 Appellate Proceedings: Florida Supreme Court (Case No. 60-73,064) Ponticelli v. State, 593 So. 2d 483 (Fla. 1991) Conviction and Sentence Affirmed: October 10, 1991 Petition for Writ of Certiorari: United States Supreme Court Ponticelli v. Florida, 506 U.S. 802 (1992) Vacated Judgement and Remanded: October 5, 1992 Proceedings on Remand to the Florida Supreme Court: Florida Supreme Court (Case No. 60-73,064) Ponticelli v. State, 618 So. 2d 154 (Fla. 1993) Death Sentence Affirmed: March 4, 1993 Initial Postconviction Proceedings: Circuit Court of Marion County, Florida State of Florida v. Anthony Ponticelli, Case No. 87-2719 CF Judgement Entered November 1, 2002 (denying motion) Appellate Proceedings: Florida Supreme Court (Case No. SC03-17) Ponticelli v. State, 941 So. 2d 1073 (Fla. 2006) Affirmed: August 31, 2006 Successive Postconviction Proceedings: Circuit Court of Marion County, Florida State of Florida v. Anthony Ponticelli, Case No. 87-2719 CF Judgement Entered November 1, 2003 (denying motion) Appellate Proceedings: Florida Supreme Court (Case No. SC03-1655) Ponticelli v. State, 879 So. 2d 623 (Fla. 2004) Affirmed: June 9, 2004 Second Successive Postconviction Proceedings: Circuit Court of Marion County, Florida State of Florida v. Anthony Ponticelli, Case No. 87-2719 CF Judgement Entered March 16, 2009 (denying motion) Appellate Proceedings: ii Florida Supreme Court (Case No. SC09-992) Ponticelli v. State, 49 So. 3d 236 (Fla. 2010) Affirmed: November 10, 2010 Third Successive Postconviction Proceedings: Circuit Court of Marion County, Florida State of Florida v. Anthony Ponticelli, Case No. 87-2719 CF Judgement Entered April 1, 2011 (denying motion) Appellate Proceedings: Florida Supreme Court (Case No. SC11-877) Ponticelli v. State, 90 So. 3d 823 (Fla. 2012) Affirmed: April 26, 2012 Appellate Proceedings: Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals (Case No. 11-11966) Ponticelli v. Sec’y, Dept. of Corrs., 690 F.3d 1271 (11th Cir. 2012) Affirmed: August 16, 2012 Fourth Successive Postconviction Proceedings: Circuit Court of Marion County, Florida State of Florida v. Anthony Ponticelli, Case No. 87-2719 CF Judgement Entered May 9, 2017 (denying motion) Appellate Proceedings: Florida Supreme Court (Case No. SC19-607) Ponticelli v. State, 297 So. 3d 1292 (Fla. 2020) Affirmed: April 16, 2020 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE QUESTION PRESENTED--CAPITAL CASE. i NOTICE OF RELATED CASES . ii TABLE OF CONTENTS . iv TABLE OF AUTHORITIES. v CITATION TO OPINION BELOW . 1 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION . 1 CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED. 2 PROCEDURAL HISTORY. 2 FACTS RELEVANT TO QUESTIONS PRESENTED . 5 THE STATE COURT’S RULING. 7 REASONS FOR GRANTING THE WRIT . 7 I. THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT ERRONEOUSLY APPLIED POOLE v. STATE AND McKINNEY v. ARIZONA, TO MR. PONTICELLI’S CLAIM THAT THE STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION IN HURST v. STATE, IDENTIFIED THE ELEMENTS OF CAPITAL MURDER AT THE TIME OF HIS SENTENCING IN 1988. 7 CONCLUSION. 20 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE. 20 iv TABLE OF AUTHORITIES PAGE Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). 20 Bouie v. City of Columbia, 378 U.S. 347 (1964). 14 Brinkerhoff-Faris Trust & Sav. Co. v. Hill, 281 U.S. 673 (1930). 14 Dixon v. State., 283 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1973) . 12 Espinosa v. Florida, 505 U.S. 1079 (Fla. 1992). 3 Hurst v. Florida, 136 S.Ct. 616 (2016) . 5 Hurst v. State, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016). 5, 7-8, 11-12 Lowenfield v. Phelps, 484 U.S. 231 (1988). 10-11 McKinney v. Arizona, 140 S.Ct. 702 (2020) . 16 Parker v. Dugger, 498 U.S. 308 (1991). 15 Ponticelli v. Florida, 506 So. 2d 802 (1992) . 3, 19 Ponticelli v. Sec’y Dept. Of Corrs., 690 F.3d 1272 (11th Cir. 2012) . 5 Ponticelli v. State, 593 So. 2d 483 (Fla. 1991). 3, 5, 6 Ponticelli v. State, 618 So. 2d 154 (Fla. 1993). 3 Ponticelli v. State, 879 So. 2d 623 (Fla. 2004) . 4 Ponticelli v. State, 941 So. 2d 1073 (Fla. 2006) . 3 v Ponticelli v. State, 49 So. 3d 236 (Fla. 2010). 4 Ponticelli v. State, 90 So. 3d 823 (Fla. 2012). 5 Ponticelli v. State, 297 So. 3d 1292 (Fla. 2020). 1, 5, 7 Porter v. McCollum, 558 U.S. 30 (2009) . 4 Porter v. State, 564 So. 2d 1060 (Fla. 1990). 11 Ramos v. Louisiana, 140 S.Ct. 1390 (2020). 18 Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002). 20 Rogers v. Tennessee, 532 U.S. 451 (2001). 15 Schiro v. Summerlin, 542 U.S. 348 (2004). 18 State v. Poole, 297 So. 3d 487 (Fla. 2020) . 13 Stringer v. Black, 503 U.S. 222 (1992). 9-10 White v. State, 415 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1982) . 15 White v. State, 729 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 1999) . 15 White v. State, 817 So. 2d 799 (Fla. 2002) . 15 vi IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM, 2020 --------------------------------- ANTHONY JOHN PONTICELLI, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. --------------------------------- Anthony John Ponticelli respectfully petitions this Court for a writ of certiorari to review the decision of the Florida Supreme Court. CITATION TO OPINION BELOW The Florida Supreme Court’s decision appears as Ponticelli v. State, 297 So. 3d 1292 (Fla. 2020), and is Attachment A to this petition. The order denying rehearing is Attachment B to this petition. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION Petitioner invokes this Court's jurisdiction to grant the Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Florida Supreme Court on the basis of 28 U.S.C. Section 1257. The Florida Supreme Court entered its opinion on April 16, 2020. Rehearing was denied on July 2, 2020. 1 CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED The Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States provides: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed .... The Eighth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States provides in relevant part: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel or unusual punishments inflicted. The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States provides, in relevant part: No State shall . deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws PROCEDURAL HISTORY Mr. Ponticelli was indicted on January 4, 1988, with two counts of first-degree murder and one count of armed robbery (R. 1375-6). Mr. Ponticelli pled not guilty (R. 1385). Mr. Ponticelli’s capital jury trial commenced on August 9, 1988. After the State rested, the trial court granted the defense’s motion for judgment of acquittal as to the armed robbery count (R. 941). Guilty verdicts were returned on both counts of first degree murder on August 12, 1988. The penalty phase began on August 18, 1988. That same day, the jury recommended a death sentence by a vote of nine to three for each of the murders (R. 1371-2). A sentencing hearing was 2 held on September 6, 1988, at which time Mr. Ponticelli was sentenced to death for the two counts of first degree murder (R. 1849-51). On direct appeal, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed Mr. Ponticelli’s convictions and sentences. Ponticelli v. State, 593 So. 2d 483 (Fla. 1991). After filing a writ of certiorari, this Court vacated the judgment and remanded for further consideration in light of Espinosa v. Florida, 505 U.S. 1079 (1992). Ponticelli v. Florida, 506 U.S. 802 (1992). The Florida Supreme Court found Mr. Ponticelli’s challenge to his jury instructions procedurally barred. Ponticelli v. State, 618 So. 2d 154 (Fla. 1993). A motion to vacate sentence pursuant to Rule 3.850 was filed on April 11, 1995 (Supp. PC-R. 1-60). On July 10, 2000, an evidentiary hearing commenced. Following the hearing, the lower court entered an order denying all relief on November 1, 2002 (Supp. PC-R. 1736-60). Mr. Ponticelli appealed to the Florida Supreme Court. Simultaneously, with his appeal, Mr. Ponticelli filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus. The Florida Supreme Court denied all relief on August 31, 2006. Ponticelli v. State, 941 So. 2d 1073 (Fla. 2006). While Mr.
Recommended publications
  • Motion for Appropriate Relief Pursuant to the Racial Justice Act

    Motion for Appropriate Relief Pursuant to the Racial Justice Act

    STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE COUNTY OF STANLY SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION 95 CRS 567 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ) v. ) ) GUY TOBIAS LEGRANDE, Defendant. ) ........................................................... MOTION FOR APPROPRIATE RELIEF PURSUANT TO THE RACIAL JUSTICE ACT ............................................................ Defendant, Guy Tobias LeGrande, through counsel, files this Motion for Appropriate Relief pursuant to the Racial Justice Act (HA), N.C. Gen. Stat. $$ 15A-2010 to 15A-2012, the Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and Art. I, $9 1, 19, 24, 26, and 27 of the North Carolina Constitution. Under the RJA and constitutional law, Defendant, who is currently under a sentence of death, is entitled to a sentence of life imprisonment without parole. INTRODUCTION 1. The evidence set out in this Motion establishes that race is a significant factor in North Carolina's system of capital punishment. The comprehensive, scientific study presented here demonstrates that race is a significant factor in capital proceedings. Prosecutors across the state strike eligible black and other racial minority venire members at double the rate they strike eligible white venire members and individuals who kill whites have significantly increased odds of receiving a death sentence than those who kill blacks or other racial minorities. 2. The evidence set out in this Motion also establishes that race is an extraordinarily significant factor in capital proceedings in the 20Ih ~rosecutorialDistrict. The disparity seen between the prosecutors' strikes of eligible black and other racial minority venire members compared to eligible white venire members is the highest of any district in North Carolina that has more than one person currently on death row.
  • Death Row U.S.A

    Death Row U.S.A

    DEATH ROW U.S.A. Summer 2013 A quarterly report by the Criminal Justice Project of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Deborah Fins, Esq. Consultant to the Criminal Justice Project NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Death Row U.S.A. Summer 2013 (As of July 1, 2013) TOTAL NUMBER OF DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWN TO LDF: 3,095 Race of Defendant: White 1,334 (43.10%) Black 1,291 (41.71%) Latino/Latina 391 (12.63%) Native American 33 (1.07%) Asian 45 (1.42%) Unknown at this issue 1 (0.03%) Gender: Male 3,034 (98.03%) Female 61 (1.97%) JURISDICTIONS WITH CURRENT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 35 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wyoming, U.S. Government, U.S. Military. JURISDICTIONS WITHOUT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 18 Alaska, Connecticut [see note below], District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico [see note below], New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin. [NOTE: Connecticut and New Mexico repealed the death penalty prospectively. The men already sentenced in each state remain under sentence of death.] Death Row U.S.A. Page 1 In the United States Supreme Court Update to Spring 2013 Issue of Significant Criminal, Habeas, & Other Pending Cases for Cases to Be Decided in October Term 2012 and October Term 2013 1. CASES RAISING CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS Article I § 10 Ex Post Facto Clause Peugh v.
  • 200Th Execution Organizing Packet

    200Th Execution Organizing Packet

    Organizing Packet: 200 Executions Under Governor Rick Perry Texas Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty 2709 S. Lamar Blvd. Austin, TX 78704 (512) 441-1808 www.tcadp.org May 22, 2009 Dear TCADP Members and Supporters, On June 2, 2009 – barring any last-minute stays – the State of Texas will carry out the 200 th execution during the administration of Governor Rick Perry. This shameful milestone provides us with an opportunity to draw attention to the fact that the pace of executions in our state continues to be at odds with the positive momentum that has been generated on the death penalty issue both nationally and here in Texas. On this occasion, we encourage TCADP members and supporters to engage in activities at the local level that educate the public about the death penalty and also serve as a witness to the 200 men and women executed and the 279 victims of these crimes. This organizing packet contains the following materials: • Ideas for action • Talking points regarding the 200 th execution • A sample letter to the editor • A fact sheet on 200 executions under Governor Perry • A handout with the names of those who have been executed and the victims Also, in case you haven’t done so already, we urge you to read the report that Amnesty International released last month: Too much cruelty, too little clemency: Texas nears 200th execution under current governor . This document focuses on some of the most egregious executions that have taken place in the last eight years in Texas, including those involving juvenile offenders, persons with severe mental illness, and foreign nationals.
  • Seeking Justice in TEXAS TEXASCOALITIONTOA BOLISHTHEDEATHPENALTY

    Seeking Justice in TEXAS TEXASCOALITIONTOA BOLISHTHEDEATHPENALTY

    Seeking Justice IN TEXAS TEXASCOALITIONTOA BOLISHTHEDEATHPENALTY WORKING TO ABOLISH THE DEATH PENALTY IN TEXAS/FALL 2005 The Journey of Hope is Coming to Texas by Bill Pelke Murder victims family Beginning in Houston, and Coalition to Abolish the Inside this issue: members who oppose the reaching out to communities in Death Penalty. On Saturday death penalty will address Beaumont, Corpus Christi, the 29th a march to the State News from Nancy 2, 3 the statement often used by Victoria and Huntsville, the Capitol for a rally will be pro death penalty forces: Journey speakers will present held. The march and rally “You would support the their testimonies in high will combine the forces of the Shout out Show 3 death penalty if someone in schools, colleges, churches and Journey, the NCADP, your family were killed.” other various venues for five TCADP, Campaign to End TCADP Chapter News 4, 5 Family members of murder days before moving on to the the Death Penalty and the victims will be coming to Dallas/Fort Worth area doing Moratorium Network. Activ- Legislative Update 6, 7 the Texas Journey of Hope similar events for the next four ists are greatly encouraged to Frances Newton 7 from around the country. days. join the Journey tour, the For 17 days they will be NCADP conference and the Death Penalty Articles 8,9 sharing their stories of their "I am a Christian, Capital march. The Journey own journey ‘from violence and Jesus said, couldn't happen without activ- New Staff 10 to healing’. Speakers will ist support across the state of be talking about how the ‘Whosoever has no Texas.
  • White V. Johnson

    White V. Johnson

    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION Melvin Wayne White, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. } ) Gary Johnson, ) Executive Director, ) Texas Department of Criminal Justice, ) ) Doug Dretke ) No. _____ Director, Correctional Institutions Division ) (death-penalty case) Texas Department of Criminal Justice, ) ) Charles O'Reilly, ) Senior Warden, Huntsville Unit ) Huntsville, Texas, ) ) and, ) ) Unknown Executioners; ) ) Defendants. ) PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT I. Nature of Action 01. This action is brought pursuant to 42 U .S.C. § 1983 for violations and threatened violations of the right of plaintiff to be free from cruel and usual punishment under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Plaintiff seeks equitable relief. H. Plaintiff 02. Melvin White is a United States citizen and a resident ofthe State of Texas. He is currently a death-sentenced inmate under the supervision of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, TDCJ # 999317. He is held in the Polunsky Unit at 3872 F.M. South 350, Livingston, TX 77351. HI. Defendants 03. Defendant Gary Johnson is the Executive Director of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Doug Dretke is the Director of the Correctional Institutions Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ). Charles O'Reilly is the Senior Warden of the Huntsville Unit where the execution will occur. Defendants Unknown Executioners are employed by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and will carry out the scheduled execution of Plaintiff. Plaintiff does not yet know their identities. IV. Jurisdiction and Venue 04. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 (federal question), 1343 (civil rights violations), 220 1 (declaratory relief), and 2202 (further relief).