Darling v. State

Decision Date12 July 2007
Docket NumberNo. SC04-2379.,No. SC05-2020.,SC04-2379.,SC05-2020.
Citation966 So.2d 366
PartiesDolan DARLING a/k/a Sean Smith, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. Dolan Darling a/k/a Sean Smith, Petitioner, v. James R. McDonough, etc., Respondent.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

S. Gruber, Assistant CCR Counsel, Middle Region, Tampa, FL, for Appellant/Petitioner.

Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, FL, and Barbara C. Davis, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, FL, for Appellee/Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Dolan Darling seeks review of an order entered in the circuit court denying his motion to vacate his conviction of first-degree murder and sentence of death filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851 and petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), (9), Fla. Const. For the reasons explained below, we affirm the denial of the rule 3.851 motion for postconviction relief and deny the petition for writ of habeas corpus.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Dolan Darling was convicted of the first-degree murder of Grazyna Mlynarczyk ("Grace") and armed sexual battery. See Darling v. State, 808 So.2d 145, 153 (Fla. 2002). The jury, by a vote of eleven to one, recommended a sentence of death. See id. at 154. Following that recommendation, the trial judge sentenced Darling to death for the murder and to 256.5 months for the armed sexual battery. See id. On direct appeal, this Court affirmed Darling's convictions and death sentence. See id. at 166. In its opinion affirming the conviction, this Court detailed the facts surrounding the murder of Grace as follows:

The victim in this case, Grazyna Mlynarczyk ("Grace"), was a thirty-three-year-old Polish female living illegally in the United States. The State's first witness, Zdzislaw Raminski (known as "Jesse"), had met the victim in Poland in 1990 or 1991. Grace and Jesse developed a personal relationship, which continued when Grace moved to Orlando on September 28, 1992.

Jesse owned and operated Able Transportation, which provided shuttle service to and from the airport, and Grace was employed part-time with this enterprise. The last time Jesse saw Grace alive was on the morning of October 29, 1996, at around 9:30 [a.m]. At that time she was wearing shorts and a small shirt, as she was doing laundry in a facility at her apartment complex. Jesse did not exit his vehicle when talking with Grace only briefly that morning. She told Jesse that she had an appointment with a gynecologist later that day. Jesse gave Grace an AmSouth Bank envelope containing three hundred dollars cash in payment for work she had performed for the company during the prior week. Jesse drove away from the apartment complex and proceeded to work. Jesse again spoke with Grace around 10:15 a.m. by phone, and she indicated that she was still doing laundry, and would call him after she returned from her doctor's appointment. Although Jesse continued to telephone Grace throughout the day, he was unable to reach her again. Around 4:10 p.m., Jesse called again and was still unable to reach Grace. He became concerned that she had not telephoned him after her doctor's appointment, so he returned to her apartment complex.

Upon arriving there, he was surprised to find that the blinds to Grace's apartment—which she never closed during the daytime—were closed. He used his key to enter the apartment, where he found a basket with laundry in the living room, and the door to the bedroom closed. He recalled seeing no disturbed objects in the apartment. Upon entering the bedroom, however, he found Grace. She was on her back on the floor, naked from the waist down, with her face near the bed and her legs inside the closet. When she did not respond to him, Jesse moved Grace to the bed, and discovered that she was cold, and had blood on her. He proceeded to call 911 for assistance and members of the fire department arrived shortly thereafter. They soon determined that Grace was dead.

Officers from the Orange County Sheriff's Office responded to the scene and secured items of evidence found in the bathroom, which included a lotion bottle, a pair of panties, and a pink throw pillow. The pillow had a blackened area and a gunshot hole through the sides. There was blood spatter on the door of the closet, and blood present in the closet area. Two AmSouth Bank envelopes were found which contained cash totaling approximately twelve hundred dollars and a shoe box was discovered which contained one thousand dollars. There was also a wallet which held fifty-eight dollars. Jewelry located in boxes appeared to be undisturbed.

An officer who had canvassed Grace's neighborhood to determine whether there were witnesses with information regarding the murder testified that he had contacted Darling on October 30, the day after the murder. Darling's apartment was located just north of Grace's apartment. In response to the investigating officer's inquiry, Darling had said that "he was working and didn't know anything of the incident."

Id. at 148-49.

The Guilt Phase

During the guilt phase, the State presented the testimony of a number of forensic experts. See id. at 149-53. Dr. William Robert Anderson of the Orlando Medical Examiner's Office testified with regard to the cause of death and the evidence of sexual assault. See id. at 149-50. Dr. Anderson testified that both the defects in the pillow recovered from the crime scene and the victim's gunshot injury to the head were consistent with the weapon being discharged in close range of the victim with the gun pressed tightly against the pillow. See id. at 149. He also testified that death would have been nearly instantaneous with consciousness lasting for not more than a few seconds after impact. See id. Dr. Anderson further testified that the condition of the victim's vaginal and rectal injuries were consistent with nonconsensual penetration. See id. at 150. He concluded that the encounter was not consensual because the degree of pain that these injuries would have caused the victim was "not consistent with consensual sex." Id.

The doctor also noted that there were seminal fluids present in the victim's vaginal area. See id. Additionally, a fingerprint analysis expert testified that the fingerprint found on the lotion bottle recovered from the crime scene was less than one year old, and matched fingerprints obtained from Darling. See id. Finally, David Baer, a DNA expert and analyst employed at the Florida Department of Law Enforcement ("FDLE") DNA crime laboratory in Orlando, testified, based on his personal testing of the DNA samples from Darling's blood sample and the vaginal swabs containing sperm taken from the victim, that Darling's DNA matched the male DNA contained in the vaginal swabs. See id. at 152. The defense did not present any evidence. See id. at 153.

The Penalty Phase

During the penalty phase, Gerald Paul Daigneault testified that Darling had shot him in the back of the head after robbing him at gunpoint and carjacking his taxi. The testimony of Joanne Reed, a friend of victim Grace Mlynarczyk, was presented as victim impact evidence.

The defense presented four witnesses during the penalty phase. Deshane Clear testified that Darling had provided emotional support during her pregnancy with their daughter, and subsequently had expressed concern for their daughter and sent cards for various holidays. Verneki Butler, Darling's sister, testified with regard to the emotional and physical abuse Darling suffered at the hands of their alcoholic father as a child. Eleanor Bessie Smith, Darling's mother, testified that although Darling's father had provided for the children financially, he drank excessively and was physically and verbally abusive to both her and Darling. Psychiatrist Michael Hercov testified at length with regard to the abuse Darling suffered at the hands of his father, Darling's low IQ, and his difficulties in school. Dr. Hercov stressed the direct correlation found in psychiatric research between childhood abuse and the later commission of crimes of violence.

After deliberation, the jury recommended death by a vote of eleven to one. In sentencing Darling to death, the trial judge found two aggravating factors: (1) Darling's previous conviction for a felony involving the use or threat of violence to the person; i.e., the taxi-carjacking case that occurred about a week after the murder in the instant matter; and (2) that the capital felony was committed while the defendant was engaged in an armed sexual battery. In mitigation, the trial court found only one statutory mitigator, the defendant's age of twenty, and nineteen nonstatutory mitigators relating mostly to Darling's relationship with his family and his background as an abused child.1 In sentencing Darling to death, the trial court noted that the aggravating circumstances outweighed the mitigating circumstances.

Direct Appeal

On direct appeal, this Court affirmed Darling's murder conviction and death sentence, denying all of Darling's claims,2 none of which are relevant to the instant postconviction appeal. See Darling v. State, 808 So.2d 145, 153 (Fla.2002). In October 2002, certiorari was denied by the United States Supreme Court. See Darling v. Florida, 537 U.S. 848, 123 S.Ct. 190, 154 L.Ed.2d 78 (2002).

Rule 3.851 Proceedings

On September 22, 2003, Darling filed a motion to vacate judgment of conviction and sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851, alleging thirty-eight claims.3 The trial court issued an order granting the State's motion to strike and summarily denied claims 11, 12, 14-34, and 36 as shell claims. The trial court issued a separate order summarily denying certain claims and set other claims for an evidentiary hearing. The claims set for evidentiary hearing were: 1, 2, 3, 4 (merged with 15), 10 (merged with...

To continue reading

Request your trial
105 cases
  • Jones v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 22 Noviembre 2019
    ...could provide more detailed testimony, trial counsel is not ineffective for failing to present cumulative evidence.’ Darling v. State, 966 So. 2d 366, 377 (Fla. 2007)." Daniel v. State, 86 So. 3d 405, 429–30 (Ala. Crim. App. 2011)." ‘[I]n order to establish prejudice [under Strickland ], th......
  • Mashburn v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 12 Julio 2013
    ...could provide more detailed testimony, trial counsel is not ineffective for failing to present cumulative evidence.’ Darling v. State, 966 So.2d 366, 377 (Fla.2007).”86 So.3d at 429–30.For these reasons, Mashburn failed to plead sufficient facts to indicate that his trial counsel were ineff......
  • Perkins v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 17 Enero 2014
    ...of others, trial counsel would not be rendered ineffective for relying on [the expert's] qualified expert evaluation.”Darling v. State, 966 So.2d 366, 377 (Fla.2007). Counsel relied on the experts they retained to do a great deal of the investigation in this case. “In Hall v. State, 979 So.......
  • Walker v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 6 Febrero 2015
    ...could provide more detailed testimony, trial counsel is not ineffective for failing to present cumulative evidence.’ Darling v. State, 966 So.2d 366, 377 (Fla.2007).”Daniel v. State, 86 So.3d 405, 429–30 (Ala.Crim.App.2011).Counsel's manner of questioning the witnesses who testified at the ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
12 books & journal articles
  • Best evidence rule
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Is It Admissible? Part I. Testimonial Evidence
    • 1 Mayo 2022
    ...v. Lucasfilm, Ltd ., 797 F.2d 1504 (9th Cir. 1986). 20 United States v. Leight , 818 F.2d 1297 (7th Cir. 1987). 21 Darling v. State , 966 So.2d 366 (Fla., 2007). Most of the time, the best evidence rule is not applicable to photographs because the contents of the photograph are not being pr......
  • Best Evidence Rule
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Is It Admissible? - 2015 Part I - Testimonial Evidence
    • 31 Julio 2015
    ...v. Lucasfilm, Ltd ., 797 F.2d 1504 (9th Cir. 1986). 14 United States v. Leight , 818 F.2d 1297 (7th Cir. 1987). 15 Darling v. State , 966 So.2d 366 (Fla., 2007). Most of the time, the best evidence rule is not applicable to photographs because the contents of the photograph are not being pr......
  • Best Evidence Rule
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Is It Admissible? - 2017 Testimonial evidence
    • 31 Julio 2017
    ...v. Lucasfilm, Ltd ., 797 F.2d 1504 (9th Cir. 1986). 14 United States v. Leight , 818 F.2d 1297 (7th Cir. 1987). 15 Darling v. State , 966 So.2d 366 (Fla., 2007). Most of the time, the best evidence rule is not applicable to photographs because the contents of the photograph are not being pr......
  • Best Evidence Rule
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Is It Admissible? - 2014 Part I - Testimonial Evidence
    • 31 Julio 2014
    ...have the original in his possession, 19 or that he used all reasonable means to try to find it. 20 Fed. R. Evid. 15 Darling v. State , 966 So.2d 366 (Fla., 2007). Most of the time, the best evidence rule is not applicable to photographs because the contents of the photograph are not being p......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT