From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Reaves v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
Nov 4, 2009
Case No. SC08-1985 (Fla. Nov. 4, 2009)

Opinion

Case No. SC08-1985.

November 4, 2009.

Lower Tribunal No(s). 86-729-CF.


William Reaves, a prisoner under sentence of death, appeals the trial court's denial of his successive motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)( 1), Fla. Const. In his current postconviction appeal, Reaves asserts that: (1) the trial court abused its discretion in denying his public records request for the "Mirman letter"; (2) the trial court erred in summarily denying his Eighth Amendment challenge to Florida's lethal injection protocols; and (3) the Department of Corrections improperly delegated its authority to create and implement lethal injection procedures to the Attorney General's Office in violation of the separation of powers doctrine.

This Court has previously rejected the issue regarding the public records request of a letter from the assistant state attorney to defense counsel. See Kearse v. State, 969 So. 2d 976, 988-89 (Fla. 2007) (finding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's public records request of the Mirman letter because the letter contained mental impressions about the case, and as a result, the letter fit within the exemption of attorney work product); Evans v. State, 995 So. 2d 933, 941 (Fla. 2008) (also finding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's request of the Mirman letter).

The Court has also previously rejected the lethal injection claim.See Tompkins v. State, 994 So. 2d 1072, 1080-82 (Fla. 2008) (finding that the trial court did not err in summarily denying defendant's lethal injection claim because the Court "has repeatedly rejected appeals from summary denials of Eighth Amendment challenges to Florida's 2007 lethal injection protocol since the issuance ofLightbourne," and since the Lightbourne opinion, there have been two developments to support the conclusion that Florida's lethal injection protocol does not violate the Eighth Amendment, one being the United States Supreme Court decision in Baze v. Rees, 128 S.Ct. 1520 (2008), and the other is the performance of the Schwab and Henyard executions);Power v. State, 992 So. 2d 218, 220-21 (Fla. 2008) (finding that the trial court did not err in summarily denying defendant's lethal injection claim because the defendant did not assert that he would have presented any additional evidence regarding the lethal injection procedures than those presented in Lightbourne orSchwab).

With regard to the separation of powers claim, this claim is without merit because both the Department of Corrections and the Attorney General's Office are agencies under the executive branch. As a result, there cannot be a separation of powers violation.

Accordingly, the trial court's denial of postconviction relief on these three claims is hereby affirmed.

It is so ordered.

QUINCE, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, CANADY, POLSTON, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Reaves v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
Nov 4, 2009
Case No. SC08-1985 (Fla. Nov. 4, 2009)
Case details for

Reaves v. State

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM REAVES, Appellant(s) v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee(s)

Court:Supreme Court of Florida

Date published: Nov 4, 2009

Citations

Case No. SC08-1985 (Fla. Nov. 4, 2009)