Tompkins v. State

Summary

The Supreme Court of Florida affirmed the denial of Wayne Tompkins's successive postconviction motions and denied his petition invoking all-writs and habeas jurisdiction. The court rejected challenges concerning Florida's lethal-injection protocol, an ABA death-penalty report, the Governor's rescheduling of the execution, the length of time spent on death row, and newly discovered evidence. The court held that the claims were meritless, procedurally barred, or foreclosed by existing precedent.

Holdings

1. The trial court properly summarily denied Tompkins's challenge to Florida's lethal-injection protocol and was not required to permit additional testimony where the proposed evidence had already been considered in prior litigation and did not establish a basis to depart from controlling precedent.
2. The ABA Florida Death Penalty Assessment Report did not constitute newly discovered evidence warranting postconviction relief or establish that Tompkins's individual death sentence was unconstitutional.
3. Tompkins's challenge to the 2008 resetting of his execution was procedurally barred as untimely, and section 922.06(2) did not provide an enforceable right to a speedy execution or otherwise invalidate the Governor's action.
4. Tompkins's twenty-three-year stay on death row did not constitute cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment.
5. The trial court properly summarily denied Tompkins's claim based on Kimberly Quillin's affidavit because the affidavit had, at most, minimal impeachment value and was not evidence that would probably produce an acquittal or a less severe sentence.
6. Ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel is not a cognizable basis for postconviction relief in Florida.
7. Florida law does not recognize Tompkins's freestanding actual-innocence claim under the Eighth Amendment, and Tompkins failed even to satisfy the applicable newly discovered evidence standard or the federal actual-innocence threshold.
8. The trial court properly denied Tompkins's requests for additional records from FDLE and DOC because the requested records were not relevant to a Rule 3.851 proceeding and were not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence.
9. The newly disclosed statement by Kenneth Turco did not require relinquishment of jurisdiction or an evidentiary hearing because, even assuming that the prosecution knowingly presented false testimony concerning the victim's purse, the allegedly false testimony was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and could not have affected the verdict.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court improperly summarily denied Tompkins's challenge to Florida's lethal-injection protocol and denied him an opportunity to present additional witnesses.
2. Whether an ABA report concerning Florida's death-penalty system constituted newly discovered evidence establishing that Tompkins's death sentence was cruel and unusual punishment.
3. Whether Governor Crist's 2008 resetting of Tompkins's execution violated section 922.06(2), Florida Statutes, or created an enforceable right to a speedy execution.
4. Whether Tompkins's twenty-three years on death row constituted cruel and unusual punishment.
5. Whether Kimberly Quillin's affidavit constituted newly discovered evidence warranting a new trial or sentencing proceeding.
6. Whether ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel was a cognizable basis for relief.
7. Whether Florida law or the Eighth Amendment required recognition of a freestanding actual-innocence claim.
8. Whether Tompkins was entitled to additional public records under chapter 119, Florida Statutes, and Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.852.
9. Whether the newly disclosed statement by Kenneth Turco required relinquishment of jurisdiction for an evidentiary hearing on a Giglio claim.

Disposition

affirmed