Preston v. Sec'y, Department of Corr., CASE NO. 6:08-cv-2085-Orl-31GJK
Decision Date | 01 May 2012 |
Docket Number | CASE NO. 6:08-cv-2085-Orl-31GJK |
Parties | ROBERT ANTHONY PRESTON, JR., Petitioner, v. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., Respondents. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida |
This case is before the Court on the Petition for Habeas Corpus Relief (Doc. No. 1) filed by Robert Anthony Preston, Jr. Pursuant to the instructions of the Court, Respondents filed a Response (Doc. No. 13) and a Supplemental Response (Doc. No. 22) to the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Thereafter, Petitioner filed a Reply (Doc. No. 20) and Supplemental Reply (Doc. No. 23) to the responses. As discussed hereinafter, the habeas petition is denied.
The facts adduced at trial, as set forth by the Florida Supreme Court, are as follows:
Petitioner was charged by indictment with four counts of first degree murder (counts one through four),1 one count of robbery (count five), one count of kidnaping (count six), and one count sexual battery (count seven) (Ex. A-12 at 2188-90.)2 A jury trial was held, and Petitioner was found guilty of counts one, two, three, five and six. (Ex A-15 at 2696-2700.) A judgment of acquittal was entered as to counts four and seven. The trial court entered a judgment as to the robbery and kidnaping counts, see id. at 2802, and sentenced Petitioner to imprisonment for a term of fifteen years as to the robbery count and to life imprisonment as to the kidnaping count, with the sentences to run consecutively. Id. at 2802-08.
Following the penalty phase, the jury recommended death by a vote of seven to five. Id. at 2733. The trial court sentenced Petitioner to death as to the first degree murder counts.3 (Ex A-16 at 2813-19.)
On direct appeal, Petitioner raised five claims. (Ex. B.) The Supreme Court of Florida affirmed the convictions and sentences. Preston v. State, 444 So. 2d 939 (Fla. 1984).
On October 31, 1985, Petitioner filed a motion for postconviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, which was later supplemented, raising fourteen claims. (Ex. F-6 at 954-88, F-7 at 1263-88.) The trial court held an evidentiary hearing and then entered an order denying all of Petitioner's claims. (Ex. F-7 at 1307-13.) Petitioner appealed the denial, raising thirteen claims. (Ex. G.) The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial of the motion for postconviction relief. Preston v. State, 528 So. 2d 896 (Fla. 1988). The Florida Supreme Court indicated, however, that certain matters pertaining to newly discovered evidence could be presented through the filing of a motion for writ of error coram nobis. Id. at 898.
Following the issuance of a new death warrant, Petitioner filed in the Florida Supreme Court an application for leave to file a petition for writ of error coram nobis and a request for stay of execution. (Ex. L.) The petition for writ of error coram nobis centered around alleged newly discovered evidence. Petitioner also filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus with the Florida Supreme Court, raising seven claims. (Ex. M.) The Florida Supreme Court entered an opinion denying the petition for writ of error coram nobis and the petition for a writ of habeas corpus. See Preston v. State, 531 So. 2d 154 (Fla. 1988).
Petitioner next filed in the Florida Supreme Court another petition for writ of habeas corpus, which was denied without prejudice on April 20, 1989, to raise the same arguments via a Rule 3.850 motion.
On April 2, 1990, Petitioner filed a second Rule 3.850 motion, raising nine claims. See Ex. P at 53-147.4 The trial court denied the motion, see id. at 47-52, and the Florida Supreme Court entered an opinion vacating Petitioner's sentence of death and remanding the case for resentencing. See Preston v. State, 564 So. 2d 120 (Fla. 1990). The supreme court found that the vacation of Petitioner's prior violent felony conviction required that the case be remanded for resentencing since it could not be said that the vacation of the prior violent felony conviction constituted harmless error as related to his death sentence.
In January 1991, a new penalty phase jury sentencing was held. The jury recommended death by a vote of nine to three, but, subsequently, the trial court granted a motion for a new penalty phase trial. (Ex. Q-10 at 1801, 1841-44.) In April 1991, another penalty phase jury was impaneled and evidence was presented. The jury unanimously recommended a sentence of death. (Ex. Q-6 at 1130.) The trial court then sentenced Petitioner to death. (Ex. Q-9 at 1674-78; Ex. Q-10 at 1914-25.)5
Petitioner filed an appeal with the Supreme Court of Florida, raising eight claims. (Ex. R.) The Florida Supreme Court entered an opinion affirming the sentence of death. Preston v. State, 607 So. 2d 404 (Fla. 1992).
On May 24, 1994, Petitioner filed a...
To continue reading
Request your trial