Atkins v. Singletary, 80108
| Decision Date | 27 May 1993 |
| Docket Number | No. 80108,80108 |
| Citation | 622 So.2d 951 |
| Parties | 18 Fla. L. Week. S308 Phillip Alexander ATKINS, Petitioner, v. Harry K. SINGLETARY, etc., Respondent. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Larry Helm Spalding, Capital Collateral Representative, and Martin J. McClain, Chief Asst. CCR, Office of Capital Collateral Representative, Tallahassee, for petitioner.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Robert J. Landry, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for respondent.
Phillip Alexander Atkins, an inmate under sentence of death, petitions this Court for extraordinary relief and writ of habeas corpus. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, Sec. 3(b)(9), Fla. Const.
The facts of the case and procedural history are recited in the prior cases brought by Atkins in Florida and federal courts. Atkins v. Singletary, 965 F.2d 952 (11th Cir.1992) (); Atkins v. Dugger, 541 So.2d 1165 (Fla.1989) (denial of 3.850 motion); Atkins v. State, 497 So.2d 1200 (Fla.1986) (appeal after remand); Atkins v. State, 452 So.2d 529 (Fla.1984) (initial direct appeal).
Atkins now complains that he is entitled to relief on two more issues: (1) that he was denied his constitutional rights when a new jury was not impaneled during his penalty phase on remand from his initial direct appeal; and (2) that he was denied his constitutional rights when this Court denied his request for time to investigate and obtain a proffer of allegedly exculpatory evidence purportedly discovered immediately prior to oral argument.
We find both of these issues barred because they either were or should have been raised in Atkins' earlier appeals and petitions; and we find the second claim additionally barred because the matters raised by Atkins could not possibly have altered the outcome of the trial. Moreover, we find nothing in recent federal cases cited by Atkins that would lift the bar. See Espinosa v. Florida, --- U.S. ----, 112 S.Ct. 2926, 120 L.Ed.2d 854 (1992); Sochor v. Florida, --- U.S. ----, 112 S.Ct. 2114, 119 L.Ed.2d 326 (1992); Stringer v. Black, --- U.S. ----, 112 S.Ct. 1130, 117 L.Ed.2d 367 (1992). Accordingly, the present petition is denied.
It is so ordered.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Roberts v. Singletary
...See, e.g., Sims v. Singletary, 622 So.2d 980 (Fla.1993); Mills v. Singletary, 622 So.2d 943 (Fla.1993); Atkins v. Singletary, 622 So.2d 951 (Fla.1993); Turner v. Dugger, 614 So.2d 1075, 1081 (Fla.1992); Melendez v. State, 612 So.2d 1366, 1369 (Fla.1992), petition for cert. filed, (U.S. Aug.......
-
Suggs v. State, 96-80
...Successive claims are procedurally barred where issues either were or should have been raised in earlier appeals. See Atkins v. Singletary, 622 So.2d 951 (Fla.1993); Isley v. State, 652 So.2d 409 (Fla. 5th DCA Further, a defendant need not be present for resentencing where habitual offender......
-
Atkins v. State, s. 86893
...facts of the murder and procedural history are set forth in prior opinions involving the present conviction and sentence. Atkins v. Singletary, 622 So.2d 951 (Fla.1993); Atkins v. Dugger, 541 So.2d 1165 (Fla.1989); Atkins v. State, 497 So.2d 1200 (Fla.1986); Atkins v. State, 452 So.2d 529 I......
-
Gentile v. State, 97-2711
...Tallahassee, and Roberta J. Tylke, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee. PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Atkins v. Singletary, 622 So.2d 951 (Fla.1993); Isley v. State, 652 So.2d 409 (Fla. 5th DCA GRIFFIN, C.J., and HARRIS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur. ...