DOUGLAS RAY MEEKS, 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.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the death sentence of Douglas Ray Meeks for first-degree murder after remanding for a Gardner inquiry and resentencing hearing. Although the sentencing judge had relied in part on a psychiatric report containing incriminating statements, the Court found no constitutional violation because Meeks was afforded an opportunity to rebut the report's contents at the remand hearing.
The Court held that there was no Gardner violation because, following remand and an evidentiary hearing, Meeks had access to and an opportunity to rebut all information relied upon by the trial judge in imposing the death sentence. The death sentence was affirmed.
[1] A death sentence may be affirmed if the defendant has had access to and an opportunity to rebut all information relied upon by the sentencing judge.
[2] A court must conduct an evidentiary hearing on resentencing when a death sentence may have been based on undisclosed information, following the principles established in Gardner v. …
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“the response of the trial judge to the Gardner inquiry stated that "[ijnsofar as the Court is now aware, [the report] has never been seen by counsel for the State or the defendant."”
Establishes the initial concern that the psychiatric report relied upon for sentencing had not been disclosed to either party, raising a potential Gardner violation.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMeeks was convicted of first-degree murder in Taylor County. At the original sentencing, the trial judge imposed a death sentence based in part on a p…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Opportunity To Rebut Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
On October 28,1976, this Court affirmed, inter alia, the conviction of appellant for murder in the first degree and the sentence of death imposed thereon by the Circuit Court for Taylor County, Florida. See Meeks v. State, 339 So. 2d 186 (Fla.1976). Subsequent to our decision in that cause, however, the United States Supreme Court released its decision in Gardner v. Florida, 430 U.S. 349, 97 S.Ct. 1197, 51 L.Ed.2d 393 (1977). This Court thereupon issued a Gardner inquiry to the sentencing court to determine whether the death sentence of appellant had been based upon the consideration of evidence which was not known to appellant or which he had no opportunity to explain or deny.
The response of the sentencing judge stated that the sentence of death was grounded, in part, on the psychiatric report of Dr. Carrera. This report contained statements purportedly made by appellant to the examining psychiatrist in which he admitted having agreed with his accomplice to the armed robbery, which culminated in the murder in issue, that witnesses to the robbery should be shot. The testimony adduced at appellant’s trial revealed that both he and his accomplice fired shots at two individuals who were present during the robbery, one of whom died from the shooting. Appellant, however, had contended that he had never intended to kill anyone. Although the report recited that appellant’s counsel was present during the examination which formed the basis for the report, the response of the trial judge to the Gardner inquiry stated that “[ijnsofar as the Court is now aware, [the report] has never been seen by counsel for the State or the defendant.”
On July 28,1977, following our receipt of the aforementioned response of the trial judge, this Court remanded the cause to him for an evidentiary hearing on resentencing only, pursuant to Gardner v. Florida, supra. During this evidentiary hearing appellant’s counsel acknowledged that he had, in fact, been present at the psychiatric examination during which appellant made the aforementioned incriminating statements. Appellant was then afforded an opportunity to rebut this portion of the report of Dr. Carrera but, instead, his testimony confirmed the accuracy of its contents.
The trial judge found no evidence to alter the decision arrived at by him at the time of the original sentencing and, accordingly, adhered to the sentence of death and his written findings of fact in support thereof. Based upon the foregoing, this Court finds no violation of the Gardner'principle in that appellant has had access to and an opportunity to rebut all information relied upon by the trial judge in imposing the sentence of death. Therefore, the sentence of death reimposed upon appellant in this cause subsequent to the evidentiary hearing is affirmed.
It is so ordered.
ENGLAND, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, OVERTON, SUNDBERG and HATCHETT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Meeks v. State, 382 So. 2d 673 (Fla. 1980)…ion upon which the report was based. Appellant was afforded an opportunity to rebut the contents of the psychiatric report, but his testimony at the hearing only confirmed the report’s accuracy. On November 2, 1978, we reaffirmed the death sentence, 364 So. 2d 461 (Fla.1978). Appellant sought review of his original conviction and sentence as well as the Gardner proceeding by petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court, which was denied, 439 U.S. 991, 99 S.Ct. 592, 53 L.Ed.2d‘ 666 (1978)…
-
Meeks v. State, 418 So. 2d 987 (Fla. 1982)…our three prior reviews. In Meeks v. State, 339 So. 2d 186 (Fla.1976), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 991, 99 S.Ct. 592, 58 L.Ed.2d 666 (1978), we reviewed appellant’s trial on the merits and affirmed his conviction and sentence of death. In Meeks v. State, 364 So. 2d 461 [*988] (Fla.1978), this Court reaffirmed the imposition of the death sentence, after a remand for resentencing in order to comply with the dictates of Gardner v. Florida, 430 U.S. 349, 97 S.Ct. 1197, 51 L.Ed.2d 393 (1977). The Gardner violation was…
-
Meeks v. Dugger, 576 So. 2d 713 (Fla. 1991)…s not known to Meeks or which he had no opportunity to explain or deny. The trial judge subsequently stated that his decision was based solely on information known to Meeks, and this Court found no violation of the Gardner principle. Meeks v. State, 364 So. 2d 461 (Fla.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 991, 99 S.Ct. 592, 58 L.Ed.2d 666 (1978). In 1980, Meeks sought postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 after a death warrant had been signed by the governor. The trial court denied relief…
Authorities Cited
- Gardner v. Florida, 430 U.S. 349 (U.S. 1977)
- Meeks v. State, 339 So. 2d 186 (Fla. 1976)