Lowe v. State

2 So. 3d 21 (Fla. 2008) · Supreme Court of Florida · November 6, 2008 · No. Nos. SC05-633, SC05-2333

Summary

The Supreme Court of Florida reviewed Rodney Tyrone Lowe’s post-conviction appeal, habeas petition, and the State’s cross-appeal concerning his first-degree murder conviction and death sentence. The court denied relief on Lowe’s claims of ineffective assistance, Brady violations, newly discovered evidence, and cumulative error, while affirming the trial court’s order granting a new penalty phase.

Court
Supreme Court of Florida
Writing for the Court
Per Curiam; Quince, C.J.; Wells, J.; Anstead, J.; Pariente, J.; Lewis, J.
Jurisdiction
Florida
Decision date
November 6, 2008
Docket number
Nos. SC05-633, SC05-2333
Procedural posture
Lowe appealed the denial of postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851 and challenged the denial of relief on multiple guilt-phase claims. The State cross-appealed the trial court's order granting Lowe a new penalty phase. Lowe also petitioned the Supreme Court of Florida for habeas corpus based on ineffective assistance of appellate counsel and constitutional challenges to his capital sentence.
Standard of review
Following an evidentiary hearing, the court deferred to the trial court's factual findings when supported by competent substantial evidence, including credibility determinations, and reviewed legal conclusions de novo. Claims of ineffective assistance were evaluated under Strickland v. Washington. Newly discovered evidence and recantation rulings were reviewed for abuse of discretion.
Precedential value
Published opinion; binding precedent of the Supreme Court of Florida.
Parties
Rodney Tyrone Lowe v. State of Florida, Walter A. McNeil
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

post-conviction reliefsentencingineffective assistancehabeas corpusappellate procedure

Practice areas

capital post-conviction litigationcriminal procedureineffective assistance of counselhabeas corpusdeath penalty sentencing

Questions Presented

  1. Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate and present evidence that Dwayne Blackmon admitted shooting the victim.
  2. Whether the State violated Brady v. Maryland by suppressing evidence concerning Blackmon's alleged involvement.
  3. Whether newly discovered evidence and witness recantation warranted a new guilt-phase trial.
  4. Whether counsel was ineffective regarding evidence of multiple perpetrators, the time-study videotape, hearsay statements, lineup cross-examination, impeachment evidence, and inflammatory or irrelevant evidence.
  5. Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge the admissibility of Lowe's statement or impeach Patricia White.
  6. Whether the cumulative effect of the alleged errors warranted postconviction relief.
  7. Whether the trial court properly granted a new penalty phase based on ineffective assistance and newly discovered evidence concerning Blackmon's alleged confession.
  8. Whether appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise various prosecutorial-misconduct, jury-instruction, sufficiency-of-the-evidence, and evidentiary claims.
  9. Whether Florida's capital sentencing statute, section 921.141, Florida Statutes, was unconstitutional.
  10. Whether use of Lowe's juvenile convictions as a prior-violent-felony aggravator violated the Eighth Amendment or Roper v. Simmons.

Holdings

  1. Lowe failed to establish prejudice under Strickland because the testimony of Lisa Miller and Ben Carter would not have created a reasonable probability of acquittal in light of the substantial evidence establishing Lowe's participation in the felony murder.
  2. Lowe failed to prove a Brady violation because he did not establish that the State suppressed the alleged evidence or that the evidence was material under the reasonable-probability standard.
  3. The post-trial statements of Lisa Grone, Maureen McQuade, and David Stinson did not warrant a new guilt-phase trial because they did not probably produce an acquittal.
  4. The claim lacked merit because the evidence did not establish that Butts's statement satisfied the excited-utterance exception, particularly in light of his learning disability concerning numbers.
  5. Trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate and present Miller's and Carter's testimony concerning Blackmon's admissions, and Lowe was prejudiced; a new penalty phase was warranted.
  6. Lowe failed to establish ineffective assistance of appellate counsel because the omitted claims were meritless, harmless, unpreserved, or had already been rejected on direct appeal.
  7. Section 921.141, Florida Statutes, was not unconstitutional on the grounds asserted by Lowe.
  8. Using convictions based on crimes Lowe committed before age eighteen to support the prior-violent-felony aggravator did not violate Roper v. Simmons or the Eighth Amendment.

Key quotations

Even if defense counsel was deficient for failing to present Miller and Carter's testimony to rebut Blackmon's testimony, there is not a reasonable probability that their testimony would have resulted in an acquittal of Lowe of first-degree murder. (31)
Lowe has demonstrated both deficient performance and resulting prejudice under Strickland; therefore, a new penalty phase is warranted. (42)

Factual background

Lowe was convicted of participating in the attempted robbery and shooting death of Donna Burnell at a convenience store on July 3, 1990. The State presented evidence including Lowe's fingerprints at the scene, his girlfriend's car near the store, use of Lowe's gun in the shooting, his work time card, and statements implicating him. Postconviction witnesses testified that Dwayne Blackmon admitted participating in the robbery and shooting Burnell, but the trial court and Supreme Court distinguished the effect of that evidence on the guilt phase from its effect on the penalty phase.

Procedural history

Lowe was convicted of attempted robbery and first-degree murder and sentenced to death. His convictions and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal. After extensive postconviction proceedings, the trial court denied relief on the guilt-phase claims but granted a new penalty phase based on ineffective assistance and newly discovered evidence concerning Dwayne Blackmon's alleged confession. The Supreme Court of Florida affirmed the trial court's order and denied habeas relief.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…