Hildwin v. State

Summary

The Supreme Court of Florida affirmed the denial of Paul Hildwin's postconviction motion challenging his first-degree murder conviction and death sentence. The court held that newly discovered DNA evidence excluding Hildwin as the source of biological material did not probably produce an acquittal or lesser sentence, and it upheld exclusion of mock-jury evidence. The court also rejected Hildwin's fatal-variance and cumulative-error claims.

Holdings

1. Although the DNA evidence was newly discovered and significant because it refuted the trial serology evidence, it was not of such a nature that it would probably produce an acquittal on retrial or prevent imposition of the death sentence.
2. The circuit court properly excluded the expert opinion testimony, mock-trial results, videotapes, scripts, and report offered to establish that the newly discovered DNA evidence would probably have resulted in an acquittal.
3. Hildwin was not entitled to relief based on an alleged fatal variance or constructive amendment because the case was prosecuted as first-degree murder, not as rape or sexual battery, and the jury was not instructed on sexual battery as the underlying felony.
4. Cumulative error did not warrant postconviction relief because the court found no error by the circuit court.

Questions Presented

1. Whether newly discovered DNA evidence excluding Hildwin as the source of semen and saliva found in the victim's car warranted a new trial, acquittal, or relief from the death sentence.
2. Whether the circuit court properly excluded expert testimony, reports, videotapes, scripts, and results from mock-jury proceedings offered to show that the DNA evidence probably would have produced an acquittal.
3. Whether evidence suggesting that Hildwin raped the victim constituted a fatal variance from or constructive amendment of the first-degree murder indictment.
4. Whether cumulative error warranted postconviction relief.

Disposition

affirmed