Chavez v. State

• Decision Date: 31 January 2014
• Docket Number: No. SC14–35.,SC14–35.
• Citation: 132 So.3d 826
• Parties: Juan Carlos CHAVEZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

132 So.3d 826

Juan Carlos CHAVEZ, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. SC14–35.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Jan. 31, 2014.

Limited on Constitutional Grounds

West's F.S.A. § 14.28

[132 So.3d 828]

Robert A. Norgard and Andrea M. Norgard of Norgard and Norgard, Bartow, FL, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, FL; Scott A. Browne, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, FL, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Juan Carlos Chavez, a prisoner under sentence of death, appeals from the denial of his second successive motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. Chavez filed the action after Governor Rick Scott signed a death warrant on January 2, 2014. For the reasons discussed below, we affirm.

BACKGROUND

Chavez was convicted of the first-degree murder, kidnapping, and sexual battery of nine-year-old Samuel James (“Jimmy”) Ryce and was sentenced to death in accordance with a unanimous jury recommendation. Chavez v. State, 12 So.3d 199, 203 (Fla.), cert. denied,558 U.S. 996, 130 S.Ct. 501, 175 L.Ed.2d 356 (2009). Chavez confessed that on the afternoon of September 11, 1995, he abducted the child at gunpoint from a school bus stop in rural Miami–Dade County and sexually assaulted the child before fatally shooting him. Id. In 2002, this Court upheld the convictions and sentences on direct appeal. Id. Chavez subsequently filed an initial postconviction motion pursuant to rule 3.851. After relief was denied by the circuit court, Chavez appealed the denial and filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus with this Court. Id. This Court upheld the denial of postconviction relief and denied the habeas petition. Id. at 203.

Chavez next filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Chavez v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr., 647 F.3d 1057, 1059 (11th Cir.2011), cert. denied,––– U.S. ––––, 132 S.Ct. 1018, 181 L.Ed.2d 752 (2012). Chavez recognized that the petition was filed outside of the one-year statute of limitations period provided by 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d) for seeking federal habeas relief, but sought equitable tolling of the statute of limitations. Id. The federal district court dismissed Chavez's habeas petition, concluding that even if all allegations in the petition were true, Chavez would still not be entitled to enough equitable tolling to bring the filing within the statute of limitations period. Id. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal. Id. at 1073.

On April 16, 2012, Chavez filed a successive motion for postconviction relief. Chavez first asserted that Florida's capital sentencing scheme violates Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584, 122 S.Ct. 2428, 153 L.Ed.2d 556 (2002), in light of the decision of the federal district court in Evans v. McNeil, 2011 WL 9717450 (S.D.Fla. June 20, 2011), aff'd in part and rev'd in part,699 F.3d 1249 (11th Cir.2012), cert. denied,––– U.S. ––––, 133 S.Ct. 2393, 185 L.Ed.2d 1105 (2013). Second, Chavez contended that he was entitled to relief in state court pursuant to Martinez v. Ryan, –––U.S. ––––, 132 S.Ct. 1309, 182 L.Ed.2d 272 (2012). The circuit court denied relief, and this Court affirmed the denial in a brief order. See Chavez v. State, 2013 WL 5629607 (Fla. Oct. 11, 2013) (table).

After Governor Scott signed the warrant in this case, Chavez filed numerous public

[132 So.3d 829]

records requests. On January 9, 2014, Chavez filed a second successive motion for postconviction relief, which presented three claims. First, Chavez requested that the circuit court stay the execution while he pursues his claims in federal court pursuant to Martinez. Second, Chavez challenged the constitutionality of lethal injection in Florida. Lastly, Chavez contended that he was denied due process during the clemency proceedings. Chavez requested an evidentiary hearing on the lethal injection and clemency claims.

After a Huff¹ hearing, the circuit court entered an order that summarily denied all claims and rejected Chavez's request for a stay. The circuit court also entered orders denying Chavez's requests for public records filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.852(i) from the Florida Department of Corrections (DOC), the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE), the Office of the Medical Examiner for the Eighth District, and the Florida Parole Commission and its Office of Executive Clemency.

This appeal followed.

ANALYSIS

We have reviewed each of Chavez's claims in detail. With the exception of the request for a stay, the claims are virtually identical to those presented in Muhammad v. State, 132 So.3d 176, 2013 WL 6869010 (Fla.2013), cert. denied,––– U.S. ––––, 134 S.Ct. 894, 187 L.Ed.2d 700 (2014). Accordingly, our analysis with regard to the public records, lethal injection, and clemency claims is controlled by Muhammad.

Public Records Requests

This Court reviews denials of public records requests under the abuse of discretion standard. Pardo v. State, 108 So.3d 558, 565 (Fla.), cert. denied,––– U.S. ––––, 133 S.Ct. 815, 184 L.Ed.2d 602 (2012). A circuit court may order the production of public records under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.852(i) only upon finding that:

(A) collateral counsel has made a timely and diligent search of the records repository;

(B) collateral counsel's affidavit identifies with specificity those additional public records that are not at the records repository;

(C) the additional public records sought are either relevant to the subject matter of a proceeding under rule 3.851 or appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence; and

(D) the additional records request is not overly broad or unduly burdensome.

Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.852(i)(2). Further, a defendant bears the burden of demonstrating that the records sought relate to a colorable claim for postconviction relief. Mann v. State, 112 So.3d 1158, 1163 (Fla.2013).

DOC and FDLE—Chavez requested that the FDLE produce execution logs and notes created by the FDLE agents who observed eleven prior executions. He requested that the DOC produce: (1) records relating to the decision to use midazolam hydrochloride in executions and the decision to retain the three-drug protocol; (2) records relating to consultations with experts about midazolam hydrochloride before the current lethal injection protocol was issued; (3) records identifying the manufacturer and distributor of the drugs used in the lethal injection protocol; (4) checklists and notes prepared by DOC personnel with regard to the executions of

[132 So.3d 830]

twelve inmates; and (5) a list of witnesses to the execution of one inmate.

With the exception of the execution witness list, the records sought by Chavez were previously requested by Askari Abdullah Muhammad during his warrant proceedings. We held that the rule 3.852(i) records requests were not related to a colorable claim. See Muhammad, 132 So.3d at 203;see also Walton v. State, 3 So.3d 1000, 1014 (Fla.2009) (holding that the “production of [records related to lethal injection] is unlikely to lead to a colorable claim for relief because the challenge to the constitutionality of lethal injection as currently administered in Florida has been fully considered and rejected by the Court”). Because we previously held in Muhammad that the circuit court...