Ellis v. State
| Citation | 622 So.2d 991 |
| Decision Date | 01 July 1993 |
| Docket Number | No. 75813,75813 |
| Parties | 18 Fla. L. Weekly S417 Ralph Kermit ELLIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Florida |
Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender and W.C. McLain, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and Mark C. Menser, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.
Ralph Kermit Ellis appeals his convictions and death sentences for two first-degree murders and a thirty-year sentence for attempted murder. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, Sec. 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.
In 1978, the City of Jacksonville experienced racial tension at Paxon High School. During this period of time, two black males--one of whom apparently was a student at Paxon--were found murdered in an broad area along U.S. Highway 1 in northern Jacksonville. Shortly thereafter, a third black male was attacked in the same general vicinity, but escaped after a struggle.
Jacksonville police records showed that the first victim, Willie Evans, had been found dead near U.S. Highway 1 on March 21, 1978. The second victim, Howard Mincey, had been found dead in the same general vicinity late in the evening of March 24, 1978. The third victim, Allen Reddick, had been attacked in the same area on July 7, 1978.
These crimes remained unsolved for eleven years. Police briefly had detained and questioned Ellis, the appellant in the present case. However, no charges were filed against Ellis prior to 1989. At the time of the murders, Ellis was seventeen years old and a student at Paxon.
In early 1989, an Ocala resident named Cecil Phillips contacted law enforcement officers about the crimes. Phillips had graduated from Paxon in 1978 and was friends with both Ellis and a person named Johnny Boehm. Phillips told sheriff's deputies that he had become a Christian in recent years and no longer could live with the secret he had been harboring since the year he had graduated.
According to Phillips, Ellis had confessed to the crimes in 1978 and said that they were racially motivated. Ellis told Phillips that Boehm had actively assisted in planning and executing the attacks. The States' theory of the case treated both Ellis and Boehm as coperpetrators.
Ellis told Phillips that the crimes were conducted in a similar manner: All three of the black males had been lured into the cab of a truck under the pretense of giving them marijuana to smoke. In each crime, the black male was seated in the truck between Ellis and Boehm and then was attacked with knives. All three crimes occurred along U.S. Highway 1 in 1978.
However, Phillips' recollection of several details was wrong. Phillips recalled that the first murder was of an older black man near Imeson Road, when in fact the first murder was of a young black found near Plummer Road. The second murder was of an older black man found near Imeson. Phillips also testified that Ellis had shown him a wallet supposedly taken from the second murder victim, whom he identified as the young black. However, the mother of the young black--Evans--testified that her son had possessed only one wallet she knew of, which was still at her house after her son was murdered.
Phillips recalled once finding Ellis washing blood from his truck. Ellis had said the blood came from a black man whom he and Boehm had killed. Ellis also showed Phillips a club-like "tire checker" that had blood on it, which Ellis said came from the black victim.
After hearing Phillips' statements in 1989, law officers responded by interviewing persons who had attended Paxon High School in 1978. The officers found other classmates who recalled incidents in which Ellis had confessed to the attacks.
One classmate, Randy Mallaly, told officers about an incident in which he had driven around with Boehm and Ellis. At one point, Ellis told Mallaly, "We're going to kill a nigger." Ellis then allegedly brandished a sawed-off shotgun. Mallaly had indicated he did not want to be part of such an incident, and nothing happened at the time.
Later that same day, Mallaly said he had seen Ellis wiping blood off an instrument. Mallaly also saw blood on the seat of the truck. Ellis had explained that "he and Johnny [Boehm] had killed a nigger." According to Mallaly, Ellis then described the murder in terms substantially the same as the confession given to Phillips. Shortly before this incident, Mallaly said he had seen Boehm's vehicle driving away from the place where Ellis was cleaning the instrument.
Mallaly also told police that, later that same year, Ellis had told him of a second murder involving a black male victim.
Ellis also told Mallaly about a third incident in which Ellis and Boehm had attempted to kill a black male but had not succeeded because the man had struggled with them. During the struggle, Boehm accidentally cut Ellis with a knife. An emergency room doctor verified that he had treated Ellis on the same day the third incident had occurred along U.S. Highway 1.
Another person, Richard Feagle (the stepson of Boehm), gave a sworn statement to police that contained substantially the same information about the crimes. The statement linked Ellis to a murder on Plummer Road. In court, however, Feagle recanted 1 and stated that his information had come from newspaper articles and Paxon High School gossip. 2 The court called Feagle as a court witness and the state, over a defense objection, impeached Feagle's testimony with his own prior sworn statement made under subpoena of the State Attorney.
Ellis took the stand in his own defense and testified that he had never committed the crimes. Ellis said there had been high-school rumors that he and Boehm had committed murder, but that these were not true. The cut on his arm was only an accident, said Ellis. There was evidence suggesting that Ellis had cultivated a "tough" image in high school, partly to prevent others from attacking him during the racial tensions of the time.
On December 8, 1989, the jury returned verdicts of guilty on all counts.
Prior to sentencing, the state dropped all charges against Boehm. The prosecutor explained that there was no direct or circumstantial evidence against Boehm other than Ellis' statements.
On December 15, 1989, the jury recommended a sentence of death by a vote of 8 to 4 on both murder counts. On March 2, 1990, the trial court imposed a sentence of death for each of the murder counts and a consecutive term of thirty years for the attempted murder count.
During the penalty phase, the state presented no case of its own. Ellis presented testimony: (a) that he was a good neighbor; (b) that he was a good father to his children and was very caring of them, and that his children loved him dearly; (c) that he is honest; (d) that he had a good reputation; (e) that he was a good, faithful, and dependable employee; (f) that he was a good and supportive husband to his wife; (g) that he was a well-liked friend; (h) that he was a hard-working man; (i) that he was a family man; (j) that he had caused no problems in jail; (k) that the murders occurred at a time when Paxon High School was full of racial strife and was a very violent place; (l ) that his neighbors refused to believe he was guilty of the crimes; (m) that Ellis had no problem working with black people on the job and socialized with blacks quite well; (n) that he was good to his mother, father, brother, and sister; and (o) that Ellis has voluntarily turned himself in to the police. Several of the witnesses testifying for Ellis were law enforcement officers.
On cross examination, the state elicited testimony that Ellis had sometimes picked fights in high school and did not "back down" from a fight. On redirect, Ellis elicited testimony from one white witness that Paxon High School had become so racially violent in 1978 that the witness was beaten with a pipe by ten or eleven blacks for no reason.
On rebuttal, the state introduced evidence that Ellis was not a model prisoner because he had thrown urine on black inmates in the jail and had called them "niggers." On cross examination, Ellis introduced evidence that the black inmates had been harassing him, and that jail officials had to move him to an isolation cell for his own safety.
In the penalty phase, the State several times suggested that Ellis and Boehm were equal participants in the murder.
During the penalty instructions, the court told the jury it could consider nonstatutory mitigating evidence.
In its sentencing order, the trial court found the following aggravating circumstances: (a) previous conviction of a violent felony, specifically, any of the other crimes for which Ellis was convicted; (b) murder committed during the commission of a robbery (the taking of one of the victim's wallet) or a kidnapping; (c) the murders were heinous, atrocious, or cruel; (d) the murders were cold, calculated, and premeditated.
The trial court's sentencing order does not expressly consider any nonstatutory mitigating evidence. In its preface to the pertinent portion of the order, the trial court states as follows:
The Court now analyzes each of the mitigating circumstances specified by the Legislature in Section 921.141(6), Florida Statutes (1989).
The court then listed each of the statutory mitigating factors. Of these, the court found only one: no significant history of prior criminal activity, as shown by the fact that Ellis had "been a model citizen" since 1978. The court expressly rejected Ellis' claim that his age at the time of the murder was mitigating because "[t]he actions and statements of the Defendant indicate a mature, but hate-filled, mind fully cognizant of his actions and responsibilities."
We find a few issues that are dispositive and merit discussion.
Ellis argues that it was error for the trial court to permit into evidence Feagle's prior statement. At first blush the statement...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
First Union Nat. Bank v. Turney
...Court's interpretation of Rule 104(a) is persuasive authority as to the proper interpretation of section 90.105(1). See Ellis v. State, 622 So.2d 991, 997 (Fla.1993); Whigum v. Heilig-Meyers Furniture, Inc., 682 So.2d 643, 646-47 (Fla. 1st DCA 11. An analogy does exist between trust counsel......
-
Ramirez v. State
...held that when the murder is committed by a minor, the mitigating factor of age must be found and given "full weight." Ellis v. State, 622 So.2d 991, 1001 n. 7 (Fla.1993) (emphasis supplied). "[T]he weight can be diminished by other evidence showing unusual maturity." Id. at 1001; see also ......
-
Goodwin v. State
...rule of statutory construction that statutory language cannot be construed so as to render it potentially meaningless." Ellis v. State, 622 So.2d 991, 1001 (Fla.1993). 3. "[T]his Court is eminently qualified to give Florida statutes a narrowing construction to comply with our state and fede......
-
Smith v. State
...to rebut aggravation proposed by the State. Kormondy v. State, 845 So.2d 41, 51-52 (Fla.2003) (citation omitted) (quoting Ellis v. State, 622 So.2d 991, 1001 (Fla.1993)). During the penalty phase, Smith presented the testimony of various witnesses who testified positively as to Smith's rela......
-
Proposals for settlement in PIP Cases: Should U.S. Security Ins. Co. v. Cahuasqui be overturned?
...of Environmental Protection, 702 So. 2d 1352 (Fla. 1st D.C.A. 1997). (12) See Cahuasqui, 760 So. 2d at 1104. See also Ellis v. State, 622 So. 2d 991 (Fla. (13) Cahuasqui, 760 So. 2d at 1105. (14) See FLA. SM. CL. R. 7.020(a). (15) See Cahuasqui, 760 So. 2d at 1108. ("The Legislature has spo......