 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Happ v. State12/8/2005
William Happ, a prisoner under a sentence of death for a conviction of first-degree murder, appeals an order of the circuit court denying his amended motion for post-conviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, ยง 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. For the reasons expressed below, we affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The underlying circumstances of the case against Happ are set out in this Court's decision in Happ's direct appeal.
n May 24, 1986, a fisherman found the partially clad body of a woman on the bank of the Cross-Florida Barge Canal in northwest Citrus County. The woman's shoulders were covered by a tee shirt that was pulled up to her underarms, and a pair of stretch pants were tied tightly around her neck. The medical examiner testified that her face and skull were badly bruised and hemorrhaged, that she had multiple scrapes on her back and right heel, that she had suffered ten to twenty hard blows to the head, and that she had been anally raped before death. The cause of death was found to be strangulation.
The victim had driven from Fort Lauderdale to Yankeetown to visit a friend. Several newspaper carriers claimed to have seen a small car at a Cumberland Farms store in Crystal River at approximately 2:40 a.m. on May 24, and to have heard a woman scream at approximately the same time. The victim's car was found on May 25 at a restaurant on U.S. Highway 19, approximately six-tenths of a mile south of the Cumberland Farms store. The window on the driver's side of the car had been shattered. The glass from the car was consistent with glass found at the Cumberland Farms store and at the canal where the victim's body was found. A shoe print found outside the driver's side of the car was later found to match one of Happ's shoes. Happ's fingerprints were also found on the exterior of the car.
Happ v. State, 596 So. 2d 991, 992 (Fla.), vacated, 506 U.S. 949 (1992). Happ was indicted for first-degree murder, burglary of a conveyance with a battery therein, kidnapping, and sexual battery likely to cause serious personal injury . Id. Happ's first jury trial ended in a mistrial after the prosecutor violated an order in limine. Id. Prior to the second trial, Happ filed a motion to dismiss the indictment on double jeopardy grounds based on the trial court's finding of the prosecutor's intentional misconduct in violating the order in limine. Id. The motion to dismiss was denied. On retrial, the jury convicted Happ on all counts and recommended the death penalty by a vote of nine to three. Id. at 992-93. The trial judge subsequently sentenced Happ to death for the murder of the victim and to three consecutive life sentences on the other three counts. Id.
On direct appeal, this Court affirmed Happ's convictions and sentences, including the sentence of death, but disapproved the aggravator of cold, calculated, and premeditated (CCP) as unsupported by the evidence. Id. at 997. The United States Supreme Court vacated the judgment and remanded the case to this Court for further consideration in light of Espinosa v. Florida, 505 U.S. 1079 (1992), concerning the jury instruction for the heinous, atrocious, or cruel (HAC) aggravating factor. See Happ v. Florida, 506 U.S. 949 (1992). On remand, this Court found a challenge to the instruction on the ground of vagueness had not been preserved for review and ruled in the alternative that the reading of the defective instruction was harmless and could not have affected the jury's recommendation. See Happ v. State, 618 So. 2d 205, 206 (Fla. 1993).
Happ filed an amended motion for post-conviction relief on October 12, 1995, in which he raised thirty
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Florida Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|