DAVID ROSS DELAP, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
David Delap was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death, but the trial court was unable to complete the appellate transcript, specifically the jury voir dire, closing arguments, jury charge conferences, and jury instructions from both trial and penalty phases. The Florida Supreme Court held that because these portions of the record were essential to its mandatory review of capital cases and could not be reconstructed, the only remedy was to remand for a new trial.
Because the omitted portions of the transcript are necessary to the appellate court's complete review of the conviction and death sentence in a capital case, and those portions are impossible to reconstruct, the only remedy is to remand the case for a new trial.
[1] A new trial is required when essential portions of the trial record, such as jury voir dire and closing arguments, are unavailable and cannot be reconstructed, preventing…
[2] Appellate courts have a mandatory duty to review the entire record of a conviction and sentence of death.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“This Court has the mandatory constitutional duty to hear appeals from final judgments of trial courts imposing the death penalty.”
Establishes the constitutional imperative behind the Court's mandatory review jurisdiction in capital cases.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDelap was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death in Okeechobee County Circuit Court following a trial that occurred January 6-10, 197…
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.
PER CURIAM.
We have for consideration the motion for new trial for inability to complete the trial transcript of David Ross Delap, who was convicted of murder in the first degree and sentenced to death by the Circuit Court in and for Okeechobee County.
Notice of appeal was filed with this Court from the final judgment of conviction and sentence of death. The trial judge entered an order for transcription of reporter’s notes on May 25, 1976, directing the court reporter to transcribe and file his notes of the trial of the cause, beginning January 6, 1976, and ending January 10, 1976, but to exclude therefrom the voir dire examination of the jurors and the opening and closing statements of counsel. Thereafter, defendant filed a timely motion for supplementary transcription of the record requesting the trial court to direct the court reporter to transcribe his notes of the voir dire of the jury and closing arguments in both the trial and sentencing proceedings. On December 6, 1976, the trial court ordered the court reporter to transcribe the voir dire of the jury and closing arguments of counsel during trial and sentencing phases. A subsequent order was entered May 11, 1977, compelling the court reporter to file the transcript of the jury charge conferences, charge to the jury in both the trial and penalty phases, voir dire of the jury, and closing arguments of counsel in both the trial and penalty phases, or to show cause why he should not be adjudged in contempt of court.
On June 11, 1977, the trial judge entered an order expressly stating:
“It further appears to the Court that no portions of the transcript of the jury charge conferences; charge to the jury in both the trial and penalty phases; voir dire of the jury; or closing arguments of counsel in both the trial and penalty phases regarding the trial of this cause have been filed with the Clerk as directed by said Order of May 11, 1977.
“It further appears to the Court from inquiry of the State and the attorney for the defendant that it is impossible to reconstruct said portions of the record by stipulation or otherwise and that there appears to be no means of completing the requested record under Rule 3.7(1) Florida Appellate Rules.
“In consideration of the foregoing it is, therefore,
“ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the transcript of the jury charge conferences; charge to the jury in both the trial and penalty phases; voir dire of the jury; and, closing arguments of counsel in both the trial and penalty phases regarding the trial of the defendant herein be, and the same are hereby conclusively determined to be unavailable for inclusion in the record on appeal in this cause.”
Since the full transcript of the proceedings requested by the defendant is unavailable for review by this Court, and since the omitted requested portions of the transcript are necessary to a complete review of this cause,1 this Court has no alternative but to remand for a new trial of the cause.
Accordingly, this cause is hereby remanded to the trial court for new trial.
It is so ordered.
OVERTON, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, ENGLAND, SUNDBERG, HATCHETT and KARL, JJ., concur. . This Court has the mandatory constitutional duty to hear appeals from final judgments of trial courts imposing the death penalty. Art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla.Const. Our review is of the entire record of the conviction and the sentence of death. § 921.141, Fla.Stat. (1975). Our own rule provides:
“Upon an appeal from the judgment by a defendant who has been sentenced to death the appellate court shall review the evidence to determine if the interests of justice require a new trial, whether the insufficiency of the evidence is a ground of appeal or not.” Fla. App. Rule 6.16.
In the absence of a waiver, the defendant has the right to a complete review. Here, there was no waiver but, rather, an affirmative and timely request that the record be prepared for our use in performing our duty.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (54 total)
-
Craig v. State, 510 So. 2d 857 (Fla. 1987)…urt. The issue is whether this reconstructed version of the prosecutor’s argument to the jury at the sentencing phase of the trial is an adequate basis for appellate review of appellant’s contentions with regard to that argument. In Delap v. State, 350 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 1977), upon which appellant relies, this Court reversed a first-degree murder conviction and sentence of death due to the lack of a complete record and ordered a new trial. However, that case was substantially different from the present situat…
-
Delap v. State, 440 So. 2d 1242 (Fla. 1983)…Art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. Defendant was first convicted and sentenced to death in Okeechobee County in 1976. His conviction was reversed because of the state’s inability to provide a sufficient transcript for appellate review. Delap v. State, 350 So. 2d 462 (Fla.1977). After remand, venue was changed to Orange County. Sometime after 4:00 p.m. on June 30, 1975, the victim, Paula Etheridge, went to a laundromat to wash her clothes. She was wearing a red top and shorts. The next day the sheriff’s office…
-
Smith v. State, 407 So. 2d 894 (Fla. 1981)…tructed the court reporter not to report his final argument. Clearly, had the appellant been deprived the opportunity of a complete review through no fault of his own, there would be precedent for vacating the trial court’s decision. Delap v. State, 350 So. 2d 462 (Fla.1977). But the right to review by an appellate court of the whole record may be relinquished, hence, our observation in Delap that “[i]n the absence of a waiver, the defendant has a right to complete review.” Id. at 463, n. 1. (emphasis added).…
Previewing 3 of 54 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence