Truehill v. State
| Decision Date | 29 September 2022 |
| Docket Number | SC20-1589,SC21-828 |
| Parties | QUENTIN MARCUS TRUEHILL, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. QUENTIN MARCUS TRUEHILL, Petitioner v. RICKY D. DIXON, etc., Respondent. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court in and for St. Johns County Raul A. Zambrano, Judge - Case No. 552010CF000763XXAXMX And an Original Proceeding - Habeas Corpus
Eric Pinkard, Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, Tracy M. Henry Lisa M. Fusaro, and James L. Driscoll, Jr., Assistant Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, Middle Region, Temple Terrace Florida, for Appellant/Petitioner
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, and Patrick A Bobek, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, Florida, for Appellee/Respondent
Quentin Marcus Truehill appeals the circuit court's order denying numerous guilt and penalty phase claims raised in his postconviction motion filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851 and petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus. For the reasons that follow, we affirm the circuit court's order and deny the habeas petition.[1]
Truehill, Kentrell Johnson, and Peter Hughes embarked on a crime spree stretching from Louisiana to south Florida leaving numerous victims in their wake. That journey began when the three men escaped from a Louisiana prison and stole a black truck. They drove east, later stopping at a parking lot in Broussard, Louisiana. There, they confronted LeAnn Williams and stole her purse, which contained credit cards. Truehill and his cohorts would later use those credit cards to fund their journey.
After stealing Williams's purse, the men continued east to Pensacola where they attacked Brenda Jo Brown in an apartment complex. During the violent encounter, Truehill threatened Brown with a knife and as a result of the attack, Brown suffered serious injuries resulting in the amputation of five fingers.
The three then made their way to Tallahassee, eventually attacking Mario Rios in a parking lot. During the attack, Truehill grabbed Rios by the shirt and displayed a large knife. Rios was able to escape and later provided his shirt to law enforcement for DNA testing.
The three men then drove a short distance to another parking lot where they robbed Cris Pavlish. During this attack, Truehill swung a large knife resembling a machete at Pavlish. Though she was able to get away unharmed, Truehill succeeded in taking Pavlish's purse.
Shortly thereafter, the men encountered their final victim, Vincent Binder, as he was walking home from a study session. Binder was kidnapped and brutally murdered. His decomposed body was found in an empty field in St. Augustine. We previously described that scene as follows:
Binder's hat was about twenty-five feet away from his body with a straight-line cut on the bill going toward the hat. Binder had four stab wounds to his back and blunt-force injuries to his left head area that penetrated into the cranium. Approximately ten chopping-type injuries to the back of Binder's head caused fractures and a four-inch hole in the back of his head. In addition, Binder's ribs were fractured, his ulna bone in the left forearm was fractured, and the radius was dislocated-classic defensive injuries. Binder also sustained chopping injuries on his hands, causing fractures that also could be considered to be defensive injuries. Dr. Frederick Hobin, the medical examiner, opined that two knives were used to kill the victim, and that some of the wounds were consistent with a machete, while the stab wounds were caused by a different knife.
Truehill v. State, 211 So.3d 930, 939 (Fla. 2017).
Eventually, the three men traveled to Miami where they were ultimately arrested. Upon their arrest, more evidence of their crimes came to light. Binder's wallet, a garbage bag full of clothing, a metal handsaw, a machete, a pair of black jeans, a black knife sheath, and a pair of blue jeans were found by law enforcement in the group's motel rooms. Law enforcement submitted the evidence for DNA testing.
Also in Miami, law enforcement located the stolen truck and found a bloody knife underneath the front passenger seat. Subsequent testing of the knife revealed that eight of the bloodstains contained a complete DNA profile matching Binder. Additionally, Williams's Louisiana identification card, ATM receipts, Pavlish's personal documents, and a blood-soaked green washcloth were also found in the truck. DNA testing of the washcloth would later reveal that the stain contained a complete DNA profile that matched Binder, and a mixed DNA profile that was consistent with Binder and Johnson.
After locating this physical evidence, the State charged Truehill and his accomplices with the first-degree murder of Binder and sought the death penalty. During the ensuing guilt phase trial, the State called Williams, Brown, Rios, and Pavlish, who spoke of their encounters with Truehill. The State also called Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) analyst Suzanne Livingston, who had tested the DNA samples taken from the evidence submitted by law enforcement.
At the close of the State's case, Truehill requested a judgment of acquittal, which the trial court denied. The trial court thereafter submitted the case to the jury which found Truehill guilty of first-degree murder and kidnapping. The case then proceeded to the penalty phase.
At the penalty phase, the State presented evidence of several aggravating factors. As part of that evidence, the State showed that Truehill had been convicted of prior violent felonies and was serving a thirty-year sentence when he escaped from prison.
Following the State's case, numerous family members testified in support of Truehill. His stepmother, Miranda Truehill, testified that Truehill did not adjust well to his parents' divorce or his father's remarriage. She also stated that Truehill was an unhappy child who was more of a follower than a leader.
His sister, Jessica Gresko, testified about their upbringing, discussed the fighting that occurred between their parents, and described their father as a strict disciplinarian. She also elaborated on Truehill's troubled childhood, which included witnessing a school shooting.
His mother, Valli Trahan, testified about her marriage to Truehill's father, including the physical, verbal and emotional abuse that she suffered in front of her children. She described how Truehill was upset over the divorce and remarriage and further explained that his experience during Hurricane Katrina only made Truehill an angrier and more hostile person.
In addition to family members, the defense called Dr. Fredrick Sautter, a clinical psychologist, as a witness. He opined that Truehill suffers from posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression. In rebuttal, the State called Dr. Gregory Prichard, who testified that the level of trauma experienced by Truehill did not support a PTSD diagnosis.
At the conclusion of the penalty phase, the jury unanimously recommended that Truehill be sentenced to death. For its part, the trial court found six aggravators, which it weighed against five statutory and forty nonstatutory mitigators. Finding that the aggravating factors outweighed the mitigating circumstances, the trial court imposed a sentence of death consistent with the jury's recommendation.
Truehill appealed, raising six issues for our review.[2] Finding no merit in any of the arguments, we affirmed in all respects. Id. Truehill then sought certiorari review in the United States Supreme Court, which was denied. Truehill v. Florida, 138 S.Ct. 3 (2017).
Truehill timely filed a motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851, raising eleven claims and numerous subclaims. The circuit court summarily denied three claims but granted an evidentiary hearing on the remaining claims. After the evidentiary hearing, the circuit court entered an order denying Truehill's motion in its entirety. This appeal follows.
On appeal, Truehill argues that the circuit court erred in denying various claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, denying two Giglio[3] claims, denying a newly discovered evidence claim, and summarily denying three claims.
Ineffectiveness claims are governed by the standard set forth in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984). See Nelson v. State, 73 So.3d 77, 84 (Fla. 2011). We have recently described that standard as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial