Cook v. State, No. 75725
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | PER CURIAM; SHAW |
| Citation | 581 So.2d 141 |
| Parties | 16 Fla. L. Weekly S412 David COOK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Docket Number | No. 75725 |
| Decision Date | 30 May 1991 |
Page 141
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Rehearing Denied July 10, 1991.
Page 142
Geoffrey C. Fleck, Special Asst. Public Defender of Friend, Fleck & Gettis, South Miami, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Richard L. Polin, Asst. Atty. Gen., Miami, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
In Cook v. State, 542 So.2d 964 (Fla.1989), this Court affirmed Cook's convictions for the murders of Onelia and Rolando Betancourt. However, because we eliminated two of the aggravating circumstances, we quashed the death sentence imposed for the death of Onelia and remanded for resentencing by the judge. Cook now appeals the new sentence of death. We have jurisdiction under article V, section 3(b)(1), of the Florida Constitution.
The Betancourts worked as the midnight cleaning crew at a Burger King in South Miami. Cook murdered them during an attempted late-night robbery of the restaurant. The facts of these murders are set forth in our prior opinion in this case. See Cook. At Cook's original sentencing hearing, a majority of the jury recommended the death penalty. On resentencing, the trial judge found the following aggravating circumstances: 1) the defendant was previously convicted of another capital felony; 1 2) the murder was committed during a robbery; and 3) the murder was committed for pecuniary gain. 2 The judge merged factors
Page 143
2 and 3 into one aggravating factor. In mitigation the judge found that the defendant had no significant history of prior criminal activity. 3On this appeal Cook first claims that his sentence of death for Onelia's murder is disproportionate both to the sentences of his two accomplices and to the sentences of other defendants convicted of similar crimes. Included in this claim is Cook's assertion that the judge improperly considered aggravating factors found by this Court to be inapplicable in Cook's prior appeal. See Cook, 542 So.2d at 970 (Onelia's murder was not heinous, atrocious, or cruel and was not committed to eliminate a witness). We reject the claim that the judge considered the inapplicable aggravating factors. The written sentencing order clearly states that the judge did not find these factors and, therefore, gave them no weight when imposing the death sentence. We have reviewed the judge's statement concerning the witness-elimination factor at the oral sentencing, but do not interpret it to say that he considered this inapplicable factor when sentencing Cook.
We also reject Cook's claim concerning his accomplices' sentences since their level of participation in the murder was clearly less than Cook's. See Cook. It was Cook, not his accomplices, who killed the Betancourts. We also believe that Cook's sentence is not disproportional when compared to other defendants' sentences for similar murders. The court found two statutory aggravating...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Shere v. Moore, No. SC00-1960.
...defendant); Mordenti v. State, 630 So.2d 1080 (Fla. 1994) (codefendant received immunity for 830 So.2d 63 her testimony);9 Cook v. State, 581 So.2d 141 (Fla.1991) (codefendants pled guilty to second-degree murder and received sentences of twenty-three and twenty-four years); Hayes v. State,......
-
Deparvine v. State, No. SC06-155.
...that the trial court would have imposed the death penalty in light of finding five aggravating circumstances); see also Cook v. State, 581 So.2d 141, 143-44 (Fla. 1991) (holding that trial court erred in failing to mention mitigation evidence, but that the error was harmless "particularly i......
-
State v. Riechmann, No. SC89564
...reflects that the Court reviewed the sufficiency of the evidence presented and the propriety of the penalty imposed. See Riechmann, 581 So.2d at 141 ("There is substantial competent evidence in the record to support the convictions."). Additionally, Riechmann has not alleged what portion of......
-
Cook v. State, No. SC94134.
...if the sentencing order had contained findings that each of the nonstatutory mitigating circumstances had been proven. Cook v. State, 581 So.2d 141, 142-44 On October 7, 1991, the United States Supreme Court denied Cook's petition for writ of certiorari. See Cook v. Florida, 502 U.S. 890, 1......
-
Shere v. Moore, No. SC00-1960.
...defendant); Mordenti v. State, 630 So.2d 1080 (Fla. 1994) (codefendant received immunity for 830 So.2d 63 her testimony);9 Cook v. State, 581 So.2d 141 (Fla.1991) (codefendants pled guilty to second-degree murder and received sentences of twenty-three and twenty-four years); Hayes v. State,......
-
Deparvine v. State, No. SC06-155.
...that the trial court would have imposed the death penalty in light of finding five aggravating circumstances); see also Cook v. State, 581 So.2d 141, 143-44 (Fla. 1991) (holding that trial court erred in failing to mention mitigation evidence, but that the error was harmless "particularly i......
-
State v. Riechmann, No. SC89564
...reflects that the Court reviewed the sufficiency of the evidence presented and the propriety of the penalty imposed. See Riechmann, 581 So.2d at 141 ("There is substantial competent evidence in the record to support the convictions."). Additionally, Riechmann has not alleged what portion of......
-
Cook v. State, No. SC94134.
...if the sentencing order had contained findings that each of the nonstatutory mitigating circumstances had been proven. Cook v. State, 581 So.2d 141, 142-44 On October 7, 1991, the United States Supreme Court denied Cook's petition for writ of certiorari. See Cook v. Florida, 502 U.S. 890, 1......