Mosley v. State
| Decision Date | 22 December 2016 |
| Docket Number | No. SC14–436,No. SC14–2108,SC14–436,SC14–2108 |
| Citation | Mosley v. State, 209 So. 3d 1248 (Fla. 2016) |
| Parties | John F. MOSLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. John F. Mosley, Petitioner, v. Julie L. Jones, etc., Respondent. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Richard Adam Sichta, Susanne Kaye Sichta, and Joseph Stewart Hamrick of The Sichta Firm, LLC, Jacksonville, Florida, for Appellant/Petitioner
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Carine L. Mitz, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, for Appellee/Respondent
John F. Mosley was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder for the April 2004 deaths of his girlfriend, Lynda Wilkes, and their infant son, Jay–Quan Mosley.He received a sentence of death for the murder of his son, Jay–Quan, and a sentence of life imprisonment for the murder of Wilkes.This Court affirmed his convictions and sentence of death.Mosley v. State , 46 So.3d 510(Fla.2009).
Mosley now appeals the denial of his initial motion for postconviction relief, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851, and simultaneously petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus.We have jurisdiction.Seeart. V, §§ 3(b)(1), (9), Fla. Const.For the reasons that follow, we affirm the postconviction court's denial of relief for a new trial but grant Mosley a new penalty phase based on the United States Supreme Court's decision in Hurst v. Florida(Hurst v. Florida ), ––– U.S. ––––, 136 S.Ct. 616, 193 L.Ed.2d 504(2016), and our decision in Hurst v. State(Hurst ), 202 So.3d 40(Fla.2016).
On direct appeal, this Court summarized the relevant facts as follows:
Mosley , 46 So.3d at 514–16(footnotes omitted).The jury convicted Mosley of two counts of first-degree murder.
Following the penalty phase, the jury recommended a life sentence for the murder of Lynda Wilkes and, by a vote of eight to four, recommended a sentence of death for the murder of Jay–Quan Mosley.The court held a Spencer1 hearing and, after independently weighing the aggravating factors and mitigating circumstances, agreed with the jury's recommendation of death for the murder of Jay–Quan.In imposing the death sentence for the murder of Jay–Quan, the trial court found four aggravators applied, each of which was given great weight: (1) the victim of the capital felony was under twelve years of age; (2) the murder was cold, calculated, and premeditated (CCP); (3) the murder was committed for pecuniary gain; and (4)the...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Reynolds v. State
...v. State , 210 So.3d 630 (Fla. 2016). These issues present purely legal questions, which we review de novo. E.g. , Mosley v. State , 209 So.3d 1248, 1262 (Fla. 2016).Sixth Amendment Hurst Claim Reynolds contends that the circuit court erred in denying his successive motion for postconvictio......
-
In re Davis
...not juries, to find and weigh aggravating factors as a prerequisite to imposing a sentence of death. For example, in Mosley v. State , 209 So.3d 1248 (Fla. 2016), the Florida Supreme Court held:¶66 In the words of Justice Scalia, Ring brought about "new wisdom":The right to trial by jury gu......
-
Knight v. Fla. Dep't of Corr.
...to apply Hurst retroactively to certain state habeas cases, the Florida Supreme Court did just that. See Mosley v. State , 209 So. 3d 1248, 1274–83 (Fla. 2016) (per curiam). Florida’s retroactivity doctrine is unique to Florida—it applies to a limited class of constitutional decisions that ......
-
Jimenez v. State
...2011). "It is the net effect of the evidence that must be assessed." Jones v. State , 709 So.2d 512, 521 (Fla. 1998). Mosley v. State , 209 So.3d 1248, 1258-59 (Fla. 2016) (quoting Mungin v. State , 79 So.3d 726, 734 (Fla. 2011) ). Furthermore, to assess materiality where more than one Brad......
-
Preliminary proceedings (bail and bond; attorney for defendant)
...court to go pro se” is merely a statement about a future intent to proceed pro se and, thus, did not invoke Faretta . Mosley v. State, 209 So. 3d 1248 (Fla. 2016) Because the Florida Supreme Court has the responsibility to determine that the death penalty is being administered in a fair, co......
-
The trial (conduct of trial, jury instructions, verdict)
...no actual bias of juror could be shown – there must be something more than just a doubt about the juror’s impartiality. Mosley v. State, 209 So. 3d 1248 (Fla. 2016) Counsel is not ineffective for failing to remove a juror on the ground that the juror may have known the victim’s father when ......
-
Post-conviction relief
...lose credibility with the jury by arguing alibi under the circumstances, and had other ways to attack the state’s case. Mosley v. State, 209 So. 3d 1248 (Fla. 2016) Counsel is not ineffective for failing to object to the prosecutor’s arguments which are fair comment on evidence produced dur......