Brown v. State, No. SC19-704
Decision Date | 27 August 2020 |
Docket Number | No. SC19-704,No. SC19-1419 |
Parties | Tina Lasonya BROWN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. Tina Lasonya Brown, Petitioner, v. Mark S. Inch, etc., Respondent. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Robert Friedman, Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, Dawn B. Macready and Stacy R. Biggart, Assistant Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, Northern Region, Tallahassee, Florida, for Appellant/Petitioner
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Michael T. Kennett, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, for Appellee/Respondent
Tina Lasonya Brown appeals the circuit court's order denying her motion to vacate her conviction of first-degree murder and sentence of death filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851, and she also petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), (9), Fla. Const. For the reasons below, we affirm the circuit court's denial of postconviction relief and deny Brown's habeas petition.
The record shows that when M.A. was asked at trial why she did not intervene as Zimmerman was being attacked at Brown's trailer, M.A. testified that she was afraid that "[i]f all three of them [were] going to do it, they could do the same thing to [her]." M.A. further testified that Brown was the primary aggressor based on her observations at the trailer, although she said that Lee participated by putting a sock in the victim's mouth. According to M.A.’s trial testimony, Brown used the stun gun on the victim, held the victim's hands behind her back, led the victim to Brown's car, and forced the victim into the trunk. M.A. also testified that as Brown was attacking the victim with a stun gun, Brown screamed, "Did you call Crime Stoppers on me?"
Leaving M.A. behind at the trailer, Brown drove her car, with Miller and Lee inside and the victim in the trunk, "to a clearing in the woods about a mile and a half from the trailer park." Brown , 143 So. 3d at 396. According to Lee's trial testimony, the following events occurred once the women arrived at the clearing in the woods:
Meanwhile, Zimmerman, who had not immediately succumbed to her wounds
, walked about one-third of a mile to a neighboring home and asked for assistance. Id. at 396.
At 9:24 p.m., an emergency medical technician (EMT) arrived at the scene. When the EMT approached Zimmerman, he observed her sitting on the porch, rocking back and forth with her arms straight out. Due to the extensive nature of Zimmerman's burns, the EMT testified that he could not initially identify whether she was wearing clothing. The EMT noticed that Zimmerman's skin was falling off her body, and he believed that over ninety percent of her body was burned. She had severe head trauma
, and her jaw was either broken or severely dislocated. The EMT explained that the extent and severity of the burns prevented him from providing Zimmerman medical assistance. He testified that while he generally placed sterile gauze and oxygen on burns, he did not have enough gauze to cover her entire body. He attempted to stabilize her neck, but her skin was charred to such an extent that he could not touch Zimmerman without her skin rubbing off onto his gloves.
Despite her injuries, Zimmerman was conscious and alert. She identified Brown and Lee as her attackers and told the EMT that she was "drug out of the house, tased, beaten in the head with a crowbar, and then set on fire." She also provided her address as well as the addresses of her attackers, and asked the EMT to protect her children. The ambulance arrived within a few minutes and transported Zimmerman to the hospital. Inside the ambulance, Zimmerman repeatedly asked if she was going to recover. She told the paramedic that Brown, Miller, and Lee poured gasoline on her and set her on fire. She also stated that she "thought they had made up." Zimmerman was stabilized at a local hospital and then transferred to the Burn Center at the University of South Alabama Hospital in Mobile, Alabama, where she died sixteen days later.
Based on the information provided by Zimmerman, Brown and Lee were arrested the night of attack, and Miller was arrested when she returned home from the hospital the next day. Id. at 397. However, all three were released while Zimmerman was still in the hospital. Id.
On April 9, 2010, the day that Zimmerman died as a result of multiple thermal injuries, Brown, Miller, and Lee were rearrested. Id. The State charged Brown with first-degree murder under both theories of premeditated and felony murder with kidnapping as the underlying felony.1
At trial, Brown's jury heard that, while Brown was awaiting trial in jail, she made statements to a fellow inmate, Corie Doyle, that were indicative of her state of mind following the altercation between her daughter and Zimmerman. Id. at 395 n.1. Specifically, Doyle testified at trial that Brown told her Zimmerman had used a stun gun on her daughter, Miller, and that when Brown had heard about it, she "informed Miller, ‘[D]on't worry, I'll take care of it.’ " Id. Doyle also testified that she and Brown had a conversation early one morning during which Brown confessed her involvement in the murder. According to Doyle, at that time, Brown admitted that "they picked up the victim and beat her up and tazed her and set her on fire." When asked who "they" were, Doyle testified that it was "[Brown] and her daughter [Miller]" and that Heather Lee was there but that "she didn't have anything to do with it." When asked if she knew who Lee was at the time of this conversation, Doyle answered, "No. I have never laid eyes on her." Doyle further testified that she was eventually transferred and ended up housed with Lee.
In addition, Brown's jury heard that law enforcement had discovered physical...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Moore v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr.
...after a hearing, but only raised it in his reply brief, and Florida law treats such a claim as abandoned); see also Brown v. State, 304 So.3d 243, 267 (Fla. 2020), (holding that, by “failing to challenge the circuit court's primary bases for denying relief” in his initial brief on appeal of......
-
McKiver v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr., 18-14857
...to as long as they "are supported by competent, substantial evidence," whereas legal conclusions are reviewed de novo. Brown v. State, 304 So.3d 243, 257 (Fla. 2020). I do not look to the postconviction court's legal conclusions here. I look only to its findings of fact. Given that this sta......
-
R.C. v. Dep't of Agric. & Consumer Servs.
...and by extension, an appellate court cannot reverse on the basis of such unpreserved arguments. Id. ; see also, e.g. , Brown v. State , 304 So. 3d 243, 264 n.8 (Fla. 2020) (noting that specific evidentiary argument, although a variation on a general argument raised below, "is not preserved ......
-
Jackson v. State
...we "consider the impact of the[ ] errors cumulatively to determine whether [the defendant] has established prejudice." Brown v. State , 304 So. 3d 243, 258 (Fla. 2020) (second alteration in original) (quoting Sparre v. State , 289 So. 3d 839, 847 (Fla. 2019) ). We rejected Jackson's argumen......