Mann v. State, s. 68261

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Florida
Citation482 So.2d 1360,11 Fla. L. Weekly 47
Docket NumberNos. 68261,68262,s. 68261
Parties11 Fla. L. Weekly 47 Larry Eugene MANN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Decision Date01 February 1986

Larry Helm Spalding, Capital Collateral Representative and Steven H. Malone and

Mark A. Evans, Asst. Capital Collateral Representatives, St. Petersburg, for appellant/petitioner.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Michael Kotler, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee/respondent.


Larry Eugene Mann, a convicted murderer who is scheduled for execution on February 4, 1986 seeks reversal of a circuit court order denying relief on his motion filed pursuant to rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. Mann also seeks relief by way of a petition for habeas corpus claiming he was deprived of effective appellate counsel. He further seeks a stay of execution. We deny all relief.

Mann was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for the slaying of a ten-year-old girl. His first appeal resulted in our affirming his conviction but vacating the original sentence and remanding the cause to the trial judge for a new sentencing hearing. Mann v. State, 420 So.2d 578 (Fla.1982). The trial court resentenced Mann to death and this Court affirmed that sentence. Mann v. State, 453 So.2d 784 (Fla.1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1181, 105 S.Ct. 940, 83 L.Ed.2d 953 (1985). The governor signed Mann's death warrant on January 7, 1986. *

Mann filed his motion for relief on January 30, 1986 which was denied on the same day without an evidentiary hearing or oral argument. Our first task is to review the motion to determine if an evidentiary hearing was required. After doing so, we agree with the trial judge that none was. As to not having oral argument, the motion and attached memorandum was self-explanatory, and, considering the time constraints and the trial judge's familiarity with this case, the trial judge did not abuse his discretion by not having oral argument.

Mann files numerous contentions. Among them he claims that his trial counsel was ineffective by failing to object to what Mann now perceives to be improper prosecutorial statements. Our review of the original record belies the claim of prosecutorial misbehavior. Most of the comments complained of occurred during closing arguments in the penalty phase. Considered in the light of the overall argument, had this argument been objected to, at best it would have resulted in an admonishment to the jury to disregard. The comments could not be construed to cause substantial harm or cause material prejudice and thus would not have constituted reversible error. Breedlove v. State, 413 So.2d 1 (Fla.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 882, 103 S.Ct. 184, 74 L.Ed.2d 149 (1982); Spencer v. State, 133 So.2d 729 (Fla.1961), cert. denied, 369 U.S. 880, 82 S.Ct. 1155, 8 L.Ed.2d 283 (1962), cert. denied, 372 U.S. 904, 83 S.Ct. 742, 9 L.Ed.2d 730 (1963). If raised on appeal, we would have found the statements to be within the limits of fair comments on the evidence and permissible solicitation by the state for a death recommendation.

We see no need or benefit in discussing in detail the remainder of Mann's claims in his 3.850 motion. We do reject his contention that it is appropriate in a collateral attack on his sentence of death to attempt to collaterally attack Mann's prior conviction of a crime of violence in Mississippi; neither is it error to fail to delay the execution of his sentence prior to a ruling in...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Dugger v. Adams, 87-121
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • February 28, 1989
    ...on the ground that its presentation constituted an abuse of the Rule 3.850 process. See 475 So.2d, at 218. Second, in Mann v. State, 482 So.2d 1360 (1986), the Florida Supreme Court considered the merits of a Caldwell claim (among others), even though the claim was not raised on direct appe......
  • Mann v. Dugger, 86-3182
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • April 21, 1988
    ...the Rule 3.850 motion, and the supreme court affirmed, at the same time denying petitioner's request for habeas relief. Mann v. State, 482 So.2d 1360 Petitioner then instituted this habeas corpus action in the district court. In his petition, he attacked his conviction and sentence on sever......
  • Mann v. Dugger, 86-3182
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • May 14, 1987
    ...Supreme Court denied him any relief. The Florida Supreme Court denied his petition for a writ of habeas corpus as well. Mann v. State, 482 So.2d 1360 Mann then filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus and a stay of execution in the United States District Court for the Middle District of......
  • Mann v. Palmer, 13–11349–P.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • April 9, 2013
    ...Mr. Mann's first death warrant on January 7, 1986. Mr. Mann unsuccessfully sought collateral relief in state court. SeeMann v. State, 482 So.2d 1360 (Fla.1986). The District Court denied relief as well, but this Court reversed, vacated Mr. Mann's death sentence, and Mr. Mann received a rese......
  • 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