Lynch v. State
Decision Date | 20 September 2018 |
Docket Number | No. SC17-2235,SC17-2235 |
Citation | 254 So.3d 312 |
Parties | Richard E. LYNCH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Maria DeLiberato, Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, Lisa Marie Bort, Maria Christine Perinetti, and Raheela Ahmed, Assistant Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, Middle Region, Temple Terrace, Florida, for Appellant
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, and Donna M. Perry, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, Florida, for Appellee
This case is before the Court on appeal from an order denying a motion to vacate two sentences of death under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. Because the order concerns postconviction relief from two sentences of death, this Court has jurisdiction under article V, section 3(b)(1) of the Florida Constitution.
Richard E. Lynch pled guilty to two counts of first-degree premeditated murder, one count of armed burglary of a dwelling, and one count of kidnapping, all of which stemmed from events that occurred on March 5, 1999, and resulted in the deaths of Roseanna Morgan and her thirteen-year-old daughter, Leah Caday. Lynch v. State (Lynch I ), 841 So.2d 362, 365-66 (Fla. 2003). The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit most concisely detailed the facts surrounding the murders:
Lynch v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corrs. (Lynch IV ), 776 F.3d 1209, 1212-14 (11th Cir. 2015). Lynch's trial counsel, in considering the abundance of evidence available against Lynch, recommended that he waive a penalty phase jury because a jury would be more emotional and unsympathetic to mitigation presented for the murder of a child than a seasoned trial judge would be. Id. at 1214. Accordingly, Lynch waived his right to a penalty phase jury. Id. at 1215.1
To continue reading
Request your trial- Andres v. State, SC15-1095
-
Brant v. State
...who waives his or her right to a penalty phase jury is not entitled to relief under the Hurst decisions. See, e.g. , Lynch v. State , 254 So. 3d 312, 322 (Fla. 2018), cert. denied , ––– U.S. ––––, 139 S. Ct. 1266, 203 L.Ed.2d 283 (2019) ; Hutchinson v. State , 243 So. 3d 880, 883 (Fla.), ce......
-
McClenney v. State
...(observing that "in the absence of interdistrict conflict, district court decisions bind all Florida trial courts"); Lynch v. State, 254 So.3d 312, 323 (Fla. 2018) ("[U]nder Strickland [v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984)], claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are assessed under the l......