Opinion
No. SC08-1314.
September 14, 2009.
Lower Tribunal No(s). 78-17415.
Appellant McArthur Breedlove appeals the denial of his successive postconviction motion and his motion to determine competency. See State v. Breedlove, No. F78/17415 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. order denying successive motion for postconviction relief filed May 19, 2008). After considering the record in this case, we affirm the postconviction court's denial of relief.
In Breedlove's first claim, he alleges that he should not be executed because he is mentally ill. However, this Court has repeatedly rejected claims that mental illness bars execution. See Connor v. State, 979 So. 2d 852, 867 (Fla. 2007); Diaz v. State, 945 So. 2d 1136, 1151 (Fla. 2006); see also Power v. State, 992 So. 2d 218, 221 (Fla. 2008); Evans v. State, 975 So. 2d 1035, 1042, 1052 (Fla. 2007). Further, even if Breedlove's claim was not meritless it is not yet ripe for review. While a prisoner's "physical and mental condition may become an issue for further consideration if a death warrant is signed[, at the postconviction] stage of the proceedings, however, no [] relief is warranted." Evans, 975 So. 2d at 1042.
Next, Breedlove argues that the ABA report Evaluating Fairness and Accuracy in the State Death Penalty Systems: The Florida Death Penalty Assessment Report is newly discovered evidence establishing flaws in Florida's death penalty system. This Court has repeatedly rejected this claim. See, e.g., Diaz, 945 So. 2d at 1145-46; Rutherford v. State, 940 So. 2d 1112, 1117 (Fla. 2006). Thus, this claim is meritless.
In Breedlove's third claim, he argues that he is insane and thus cannot be executed. This claim is not yet ripe for review. See Griffin v. State, 866 So. 2d 1, 21-22 (Fla. 2003) ("While Griffin is under a death sentence, no death warrant has been signed and his execution is not imminent. Thus, the issue of Griffin's sanity for execution is not ripe. . . ."); see also Robinson v. State, 913 So. 2d 514, 524 n. 9 (Fla. 2005).
Finally, Breedlove alleges that he is currently incompetent and requests that this Court remand for a determination of competency. However, Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851(g) expressly states that "all collateral relief issues that involve only matters of record and claims that do not require the prisoner's input shall proceed in collateral proceedings notwithstanding the prisoner's incompetency." Under rule 3.851(g), only if there were factual matters involved would Breedlove's competency be at issue. See Carter v. State, 706 So. 2d 873, 875 (Fla. 1997); see also Ferguson v. State, 789 So. 2d 306 (Fla. 2001); Provenzano v. State, 739 So. 2d 1150, 1154 (Fla. 1999). Breedlove has not established that his claims involve factual matters. Thus, this claim is meritless. Accordingly, we affirm the postconviction court's denial of relief.
It is so ordered.
QUINCE, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, CANADY, POLSTON, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur.