MARSHALL LEE GORE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. | 2013-08-13
No. SC13-1281
POLSTON, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur.
120 So. 3d 554 Florida Supreme Court (2013) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

Marshall Lee Gore appealed a circuit court order finding him competent to be executed under the Eighth Amendment standard established in Ford v. Wainwright and Panetti v. Quarterman. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed, holding that Gore has a rational understanding of his impending execution and the reason for it (the murder of Ms. Novick), and that his claims of organ harvesting conspiracy constitute malingering rather than genuine delusion.


Holding

Gore is competent to be executed. The circuit court correctly applied the legal standard requiring a rational understanding of the connection between the crime and punishment. Competent, substantial evidence supports the finding that Gore is not mentally ill, does not suffer from a severe mental disorder, and is rationally aware that he is being executed for the murder of Ms. Novick. His statements about organ harvesting and conspiracies constitute malingering, not genuine delusion.


Headnotes

[1] A prisoner is entitled to an adjudication of their mental condition to determine competency for execution once they make the requisite preliminary showing that their curr…

[2] To be deemed sane for execution, a defendant must possess a rational understanding of their impending execution and the reason for it, not merely a factual awareness.

Previewing 2 of 6 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Key Quotes

“To be sane for execution, the defendant must have a rational understanding of his impending execution and the reason for it.”

Establishes the core legal standard under Ford and Panetti for competency to be executed.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Gore was sentenced to death for murder. On May 13, 2013, Governor Rick Scott signed a death warrant. Gore's counsel raised insanity claims, prompting …

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Marshall Lee Gore appeals an order entered by the Eighth Judicial Circuit Court finding him competent to be executed.1 For the reasons that follow, we affirm the circuit court’s order.

I. Background

On May 13, 2013, Governor Rick Scott signed a death warrant for Gore and set the execution for Monday, June 24, 2013. On May 18, 2013, Gore’s state counsel submitted a letter to the Governor, stating that there is reason to believe Gore is insane to be executed. Pursuant to section 922.07, Florida Statutes (2012), the Governor temporarily stayed Gore’s execution and appointed a commission of three psychiatrists to examine Gore. As a group, the psychiatrists conducted their examination on May 28, 2013, and concluded that Gore is sane to be executed. Thereafter, the Governor adopted the commission’s conclusion and lifted the stay.

Gore’s state counsel, Steven Hammer, did not file a motion for stay and hearing after the Governor’s determination of sanity to be executed pursuant to Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.811 and 3.812. However, Gore’s federal counsel, Todd Scher, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in federal district court, which asserted that Gore is not competent to be executed. The federal district court dismissed the petition without prejudice because Gore had not exhausted the claim in state court. And the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals granted Gore’s motion for stay of execution while it considered *556Gore’s appeal. On June 27, 2013, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal without prejudice and lifted its previously entered stay. Thereafter, on June 28, 2013, the Governor rescheduled Gore’s execution for July 10, 2013.

On July 2, 2013, the circuit court granted federal counsel’s request to represent Gore in state court. Counsel then filed in the Eighth Judicial Circuit a motion for stay and hearing pursuant to rules 3.811 and 3.812. The circuit court stayed the execution and held an evidentiary hearing on July 15 and 16, 2013.

At the evidentiary hearing, Gore presented the testimony of one mental health expert, Dr. Jethro Toomer, who interviewed Gore on July 8, 2013. In response, the State presented the testimony of two of the three psychiatrists who were appointed by the Governor to examine Gore. The State also presented the testimony of four correctional officers who have observed and interacted with Gore over the years.

After an evidentiary hearing that spanned 1 and 1/2 days, the circuit court issued an order finding Gore sane to be executed and lifting its previously entered stay. In its order, the circuit court found that Gore is feigning delusional thoughts that his execution was scheduled in order to harvest his organs, a conspiracy theory purportedly involving China, the Illuminati, Satan worshippers, the national debt, and the Governor. In fact, the circuit court determined that “[tjhere is no credible evidence that Gore’s mental state is such that he believes he is being executed for any reason other than the murder of Ms. Novick.” In addition, the circuit court concluded that Gore is not suffering from a mental illness that would affect his rational understanding of his impending execution and the reason for it. The circuit court explained that it found the State mental health experts’ testimony “to be compelling and supported by the other evidence presented to the court in this case.”

Furthermore, the circuit court noted that it “was able to observe Gore’s demeanor and functioning first hand.” The circuit court stated that “[wjith one exception of using an inappropriate word, Gore was attentive, quiet, and engaged in the proceedings,” that “[h]e assisted counsel by talking with them and appeared at times to be writing notes or messages to them,” and that “he acted as normally as any other participant in the proceedings.”

II. Analysis

Gore alleges that the circuit court erred in finding him sane to be executed. However, because there is competent, substantial evidence supporting the determination, we affirm the circuit court. See Ferguson v. State, 112 So.3d 1154, 1156 (Fla.2012) (explaining standard of review).

“[T]he Eighth Amendment prohibits a State from carrying out a sentence of death upon a prisoner who is insane.” Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399, 409-10, 106 S.Ct. 2595, 91 L.Ed.2d 335 (1986). “Under Ford, once a prisoner makes the requisite preliminary showing that his current mental state would bar his execution, the Eighth Amendment, applicable to the States under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, entitles him to an adjudication to determine his condition.” Panetti v. Quarterman, 551 U.S. 930, 934-35, 127 S.Ct. 2842, 168 L.Ed.2d 662 (2007); see also Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.811(e).

To be sane for execution, the defendant must have a rational understanding of his impending execution and the reason for it. See Panetti, 551 U.S. at 959, 127 S.Ct. 2842 (“A prisoner’s awareness of the State’s rationale for an execution is not *557the same as a rational understanding of it. Ford does not foreclose inquiry into the latter.”); Ferguson v. Fla. Dep’t of Corrs., 716 F.3d 1315, 1318 (11th Cir.2013) (“The Supreme Court has decided that a convicted murderer cannot be executed unless hé has a rational understanding of the fact that he is going to be put to death and of the reason for his execution”). In other words, a defendant must have more than a factual awareness of his impending execution and the State’s reason for it; he must have a rational understanding of the connection between his crime and impending execution. See Panetti, 551 U.S. at 959-60, 127 S.Ct. 2842; Ferguson, 716 F.3d at 1336 (explaining that Panetti “clarified that the requisite ‘awareness’ or ‘comprehension’ required by Ford was tantamount to a ‘rational understanding’ of the connection between a prisoner’s crimes and his execution”).

However, as the United States Supreme Court has explained, competency for execution does not mean that a defendant must be “normal” or “rational” as colloquially understood:

The mental state requisite for competence to suffer capital punishment neither presumes nor requires a person who would be considered “normal,” or even “rational,” in a layperson’s understanding of those terms. Someone who is condemned to death for an atrocious murder may be so callous as to be unrepentant; so self-centered and devoid of compassion as to lack all sense of guilt; so adept in transferring blame to others as to be considered, at least in the colloquial sense, to be out of touch with reality. Those states of mind, even if extreme compared to the criminal population at large, are not what petitioner contends lie at the threshold of a competence inquiry. The beginning of doubt about competence in a case like petitioner’s is not a misanthropic personality or an amoral character. It is a psychotic disorder.

Panetti, 551 U.S. at 959-60, 127 S.Ct. 2842.

In this case, the circuit court applied the correct legal standard and determined that Gore is sane to be executed. Specifically, the circuit court determined that “Gore is not mentally ill [and] that he has a rational understanding that he is being executed because he murdered Ms. Novick and will die as a result of that execution.” The circuit court concluded that “[t]here is no credible evidence that Gore’s mental state is such that he believes he is being executed for any reason other than the murder of Ms. Novick.” The circuit court explained that, although Dr. Toomer testified that Gore is not competent to be executed because of Gore’s statements regarding organ harvesting and Satan worshippers, Dr. Toomer’s testimony is not credible because Dr. Toomer had not conducted a complete evaluation, had not conducted a thorough review of Gore’s medical records, Department of Corrections records, or pro se filings, and had not interviewed anyone who had interacted regularly with Gore. Instead, Dr. Toomer relied heavily on Gore’s self reporting of his mental health history, a self report that is inconsistent with Gore’s records as well as the other evidence presented.

There is competent, substantial evidence to support the circuit court’s determination that Gore is sane to be executed. For example, Dr. Myers testified that Gore has the mental capacity to understand rationally that he is being executed and why. Both Dr. Myers and Dr. Wer-ner testified that Gore does not suffer from a mental illness of any kind, let alone a severe mental illness that is preventing him from rationally understanding the connection between his crime and punishment. Cf. Panetti, 551 U.S. at 960, 127 S.Ct. 2842 *558(“Gross delusions stemming from a severe mental disorder may put an awareness of a link between a crime and its punishment in a context so far removed from reality that the punishment can serve no proper purpose.”). Instead, Dr. Myers and Dr. Wer-ner concluded that Gore has an antisocial personality disorder. Dr. Myers and Dr. Werner explained that Gore’s statements regarding organ harvesting and the Illuminati are a goal-oriented attempt by Gore to feign a delusion in order to avoid execution. Based upon their evaluation of Gore, their review of Gore’s records, their interviews with correctional officers, and Gore’s results on the Miller Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test and the Mini-Mental State Examination-2, Dr. Myers and Dr. Werner concluded that Gore is malingering. This conclusion is consistent with the correctional officers’ testimony that Gore is manipulative of staff and only exhibits particular symptoms and unusual behavior when in the presence of certain individuals, such as Dr. Toomer, nurses, and the warden. Accordingly, the circuit court’s conclusion is supported by competent, substantial evidence.

III. Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the order of the circuit court finding Gore sane to be executed. No rehearing will be entertained by this Court, and the mandate shall issue immediately.

It is so ordered.

POLSTON, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Owen v. State, 363 So. 3d 1035 (Fla. 2023)
    …r a preponderance of the evidence standard. -3- II A Owen alleges that the circuit court erred in finding him sane to be executed. We disagree. There is competent, substantial evidence supporting the circuit court’s determination, see Gore v. State, 120 So. 3d 554, 557 (Fla. 2013), and so we affirm. “[T]he Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishments precludes executing a prisoner who has ‘lost his sanity’ after sentencing.” Madison v. Alabama, 139 S. Ct. 718, 722 (2019) (quoting Ford v. Wainwright…
  • Hutchinson v. State (Fla. 2025)
    …323 So. 3d 1241, 1247 n.8 (Fla. 2021). If no legal error is shown, we will affirm where there is "competent, substantial evidence supporting the circuit court's determination.” Owen v. State, 363 So. 3d 1035, 1038 (Fla. 2023) (citing Gore v. State, 120 So. 3d 554, 557 (Fla. 2013)). To begin, Hutchinson has failed to demonstrate any legal error in the challenged order. The court stated and applied the correct legal standards in determining that Hutchinson was sane or competent to be executed. In doing so, th…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw