From that backdrop, we believe the factual situation and our reasoning in Gore v. State, 599 So.2d 978 (Fla.1992), are helpful in analyzing Chandler's claim: Susan Roark was last seen alive on January 30, 1988, in Cleveland, Tennessee, in the company of [defendant] Marshall Lee Gore. Oba Chandler, a prisoner under sentence of death, appeals the trial court's denial of his motion for postconviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. This Court has never required the collateral crime to be absolutely identical to the crime charged. The United States Supreme Court denied Chandler's petition for writ of certiorari on April 20, 1998. [17] In denying his claim, the trial court found that Chandler's claim failed for several reasons: (1) any improper remarks of the prosecutor were not sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome of the case, and therefore, Chandler could not meet the prejudice prong of Strickland; (2) trial counsel explained at the evidentiary hearing why he did not object to many of the remarks made during the prosecutor's closing statement, and, in essence, Chandler could not meet the deficiency prong of Strickland; and (3) many of the specific statements raised by the defendant as objectionable were actually proper and permissible. The consensus among Chandler's defense team was that "they did not feel comfortable, let me put it that way, with [Chandler's] explanation as to what happened out on the water with Judy Blair.". Chandler told Stephenson that one of the girls was very attractive. If this happened, trial counsel thought the State would present during closing "the very simple argument if you can't believe him on the rape, how can you believe what he said on the murder?" Fingerprints found blair back and judy blair testimony oba chandler. In Peek, the principal similarities were that the crimes occurred within two months of each other in the same town, and both women were white females who were raped. For example, the most significant difference between the two crimes-that Roark was murdered while Corolis was not-seems to be more of a fortuitous circumstance than a reflection of Gore's intent in the Corolis crime, since he beat her, stabbed her, and left her for dead in an isolated area. [16] He asserts that trial counsel's failure to object to these comments constituted prejudicial error. 86, 139 L.Ed.2d 43 (1997). In summing up his thoughts, trial counsel stated, "If they were ever going to make a mold of what the State wants to bring to court for a rape victim, that mold is going to be this lady. Chandler maintained that he never saw any of the Rogers family again after this short encounter and adamantly denied killing them. As his last penalty phase issue, Chandler argues that the standard jury instruction on the heinous, atrocious, or cruel (HAC) aggravating circumstance is unconstitutionally vague. Therefore, any inference of guilt for the [Blair] rape from the invocation of the Fifth is undeniably harmless. Appellee's Answer Brief at 73. Chandler, by way of comparison, was given an initial selection between Pinellas or Hillsborough counties based on the indictment, and was given the additional option of stipulating to have his jury selected from Orange County. See Chandler v. State, 442 So.2d 171, 173 (Fla.1983). Judy Mogul. A hearing was held on the motion for change of venue, at which the court explained the stipulation to Chandler in great detail. We have jurisdiction. Subsequently, Chandler began making advances to Blair after the boat entered the Gulf of Mexico. 1259, 137 L.Ed.2d 338 (1997); Preston v. State, 607 So.2d 404 (Fla.1992); Sireci v. State, 587 So.2d 450 (Fla.1991); Stano v. State, 460 So.2d 890 (Fla.1984). This exchange also shows that Chandler did answer some questions about the Blair rape, while invoking the Fifth Amendment on others. However, at the Huff hearing, the trial court indicated that the parties could inquire of trial counsel as to any strategic decisions he made in not objecting to the prosecutor's closing arguments. See also Ventura v. State, 794 So.2d 553, 568 (Fla.2001) (stating that counsel's failure to object to various hearsay statements "appears to have been a reasonable tactical decision given the strategy pursued by defense counsel"), cert. At the outset, we agree with the State that much of Chandler's claim that cross-examination impermissibly exceeded the scope of direct examination is procedurally barred since no contemporaneous objection was made. Even though he did not concede guilt to the murders, given the similarities between the murders and the alleged sexual battery, trial counsel's decision should still be closely scrutinized. The Jan. 6 committee on Tuesday held its fourth public hearing on the U.S. Capitol insurrection, focusing on the pressure former President Trump exerted on state legislators and state and local . (footnotes omitted). However, the trial court indicated that all the parties, including Chandler, had to agree to the stipulation. [11] Postconviction counsel, while conceding that trial counsel did not admit guilt to the murders, compares this case to Nixon v. Singletary, 758 So.2d 618 (Fla.2000), wherein the Court held that defense counsel must have defendant's consent before counsel can make a tactical decision to admit guilt of murder during the guilt phase of a trial in an effort to persuade the jury to spare defendant's life during the penalty phase. Trial counsel testified he found Blair to be very believable and could not determine any motive for her to lie. 5 (1 rating) Leave a review. All rights reserved. [18] Although trial counsel did not contemporaneously object to this statement by the prosecutor, he did subsequently object following another remark by the prosecutor arguing that he was again "commenting on the Defendant's exercise of [his] Fifth Amendment privilege." Beyond the trial court's procedural compliance with the guidelines for evaluating mitigating circumstances, we have recognized that it is within the trial court's discretion to determine whether such mitigation has been established. Once he got out twenty to thirty miles, Chandler told her to have sex with him or swim for it. 19. He invited them for a boat ride the next morning. Hayes, 660 So.2d at 261 (second emphasis added) (citations omitted). i think, when considered in the totality of the claims, there is a likelihood, based upon the circumstantial evidence case that the state had, regarding the rogers homicides, that mr. chandler might we will have been found not guilty, had his Childhood Trauma as Nonstatutory Mitigation. One of the operators, Elizabeth Beiro, testified that she received three collect calls for Debra Chandler's telephone number, at 1:12 and 1:30 a.m. on June 2, 1989. 674 So.2d at 99-100. See, e.g., Harvey v. Dugger, 656 So.2d 1253, 1256 (Fla.1995) (holding that claims that could have been brought in direct appeal were procedurally barred from being brought in postconviction proceedings); Swafford v. Dugger, 569 So.2d 1264, 1267 (Fla.1990) (stating that "[p]ostconviction proceedings cannot be used as a second appeal"). Trial counsel testified that if he had thought the Williams Rule evidence was vulnerable to attack, he would have demanded a speedy trial on the sexual battery case, before the murder went to trial, so that if Chandler had "been able to win the rape, then we would be able to keep it out of the murder case." Geralds. For example, the only similarity between the crimes in Drake was that the victims' hands were tied behind their backs and they had left a bar with the defendant. The mode of operating theory of proving identity is based on both the similarity of and the unusual nature of the factual situations being compared. Please try again. denied, 537 U.S. 1067, 123 S.Ct. The Defendant was only ten years old when his father committed suicide. The next day a penalty phase proceeding was held, and the jury unanimously recommended that Chandler be sentenced to death for each of the three murders. Said all he had was two ounces of cocaine he could front me. Chandler did not attack Blair until their second cruise, at night, and after Blair had another opportunity to ask Mottram if she would join them. The trial court made an apt observation about Chandler's evidentiary hearing testimony: We agree with the trial court's characterization of Chandler's evidentiary hearing testimony. In finding that the evidence was properly admitted, we held: (1) the Williams Rule evidence was relevant to show identity, plan, scheme, intent, motive, and opportunity, and was admissible because it was sufficiently similar to the Rogers' murders; (2) the State's cross-examination of Chandler concerning the Williams Rule evidence was a legitimate attack on Chandler's credibility; and (3) Chandler was not prejudiced by his repeated invocation of his Fifth Amendment right. I needed some cash. Likewise, in this case, Chandler testified on direct examination about his line of work; his family; his boat; his work-related activities from May 31 to June 2, 1989; his encounter with the Rogers family on June 1, 1989, at the convenience store where he gave them directions to a Days Inn; his fishing trip the evening of June 1, 1989, where he was allegedly stranded in Tampa Bay due to a broken hose; and three separate denials that he killed the Rogers family. The following morning, May 15, 1989, Mottram decided not to go out on Chandler's boat, so Blair met Chandler alone. As to Chandler's claim regarding the prosecutor's questions about the Blair rape, we believe that this issue constitutes a classic case of trying to take the wind out of your opponent's sails by pre-emptively admitting extremely prejudicial evidence and thereby softening the blow. "); see also Cherry v. State, 659 So.2d 1069, 1073 (Fla.1995) ("The standard is not how present counsel would have proceeded, in hindsight."). See Stephens v. State, 748 So.2d 1028, 1033 (Fla.1999). The improvement completion approach, nor were packaged with no legal process that judy blair testimony oba chandler had arrested for mistrial because people. Learn more about FindLaws newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. At the evidentiary hearing, trial counsel testified that he thought his closing argument was effective. Even though collateral counsel disagrees with trial counsel's strategy for dealing with the Williams Rule evidence, this disagreement does not place trial counsel's decision on how to deal with the evidence outside the realm of reasonably effective assistance of counsel. Counsel must indicate whether, based on his investigation, he reasonably believes there to be mitigating evidence that could be presented and what that evidence would be. Among the items recovered from the car was a handwritten note on Days Inn stationery and a Clearwater Beach brochure. (Supp.1994). Id. Clearly, the trial judge was describing Koon and the compulsory procedure in this situation. 13. Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, and Candance M. Sabella, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, FL, for Appellee. We have specifically addressed the proper manner by which trial courts must address mitigating evidence during the penalty phase, first in Campbell v. State, 571 So.2d 415 (Fla.1990), and most recently in Ferrell v. State, 653 So.2d 367 (Fla.1995). Trial counsel testified at the evidentiary hearing that if he had not been able to select a jury in Orange County, he would have moved for a change of venue at that point.[7]. Miss Holliday: Yes; I do. Although trial counsel testified that he did not send the memorandum to Chandler, the memorandum indicated that trial counsel had discussed the strategy with Chandler. Rolling v. State, 825 So.2d 293, 298 (Fla.2002). ANSTEAD, C.J., WELLS, PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, and CANTERO, JJ., and SHAW, Senior Justice, concur. The trial judge pointed this out to defense counsel when he renewed his request for a standing objection. The prosecutor's comment that Chandler never told his daughters or son-in-law that he was innocent was a fair characterization of the evidence, while his other comments about Chandler and his counsel were thoughtless and petty, e.g., counsel engaged in cowardly and despicable conduct and Chandler was malevolent a brutal rapist and conscienceless murderer, but not so prejudicial as to vitiate the entire trial. Only then could the trial court, and this Court, be assured that the defendant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived this substantial and important right to show the jury why the death penalty should not be imposed in his or her particular case. Date. at 1219. Blake Leslie, an inmate at the Pinellas County Jail with Chandler in the fall of 1992, testified that Chandler told him that he took a young lady from another country for a ride in his boat. United States v. Weber, 437 F.2d 327 (3d Cir.1970). To establish prejudice, "[t]he defendant must show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. The assistant medical examiner, Dr. Edward Corcoran, performed autopsies that same day. denied, 522 U.S. 846, 118 S.Ct. Only Judy accepted his offer. Prosecutor: Did you tell her you were innocent of both crimes? Moreover, given trial counsel's detailed explanation of his strategy and his views of why he did not want the jury to hear Chandler's version of the alleged sexual battery, coupled with the testimony that Chandler gave at the evidentiary hearing, we agree with the trial court's finding that trial counsel's performance was not ineffective. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm the trial court's order denying Chandler postconviction relief. [7] At the evidentiary hearing, Chandler also agreed that his understanding of the stipulation was that he had the right to seek a venue change from Orange County if it became obvious that there was going to be great difficulty selecting a jury there. Oba CHANDLER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. The significant common features of the two crimes include the following: The victim was a small female with dark hair; Gore introduced himself as Tony; he had no automobile of his own; he was with the victim for a lengthy amount of time before the attack began; he used or threatened to use binding; the attack had both a sexual and pecuniary motive; the victim suffered trauma to the neck area; Gore transported the victim to the site of the attack in the victim's car; the victim was attacked at a trash pile on a dirt road, where the body was then left; Gore stole the victim's car and jewelry; he pawned the jewelry shortly after the theft; he fled in the victim's automobile, leaving the state where the victim was apprehended and staying with a friend or relative for a period of time after the crime; and he represented the car to be a gift or loan from a girlfriend or relative. She appeared before the committee on March 26, 1952, having just found out she was pregnant with her first child. In James, we rejected the appellant's vagueness and overbreadth challenges since the HAC instruction given at trial was the same instruction approved in Hall v. State, 614 So.2d 473 (Fla.1993), wherein this Court found that neither the instruction nor the aggravator itself was unconstitutionally vague. See also Shere v. State, 579 So.2d 86, 90 (Fla.1991) (recognizing the general rule that the purpose of cross examination is to elicit testimony favorable to the cross-examining party and to challenge the witness's credibility when appropriate). Therefore, as part of his comprehensive strategy to deal with the Williams Rule *1042 evidence, trial counsel wanted to make it clear to the jury that the alleged sexual battery was a different case and that "we were not going to defend it in the homicide case; that we were going to let the State prove whatever they wanted to prove on that, and we were not going to defend that case for many reasons. la cabana menu mount vernon, ga. mommy makeover cost milwaukee (1) hilton garden inn fort walton beach (1) Clearly, the most incriminating part of the Williams Rule evidence was the evidence itself. It's going to be Judy Blair.". Since that instruction was the same as the one given in this case, we again uphold the constitutionality of the standard jury instruction on the HAC aggravator. [16] Chandler organizes the numerous allegedly improper comments into four broad categories: (1) improper comments on Chandler's exercise of his Fifth Amendment privilege regarding the alleged sexual battery; (2) improper attacks on defense counsel and his theory of the case; (3) improper statements of the prosecutor's personal opinions and beliefs; and (4) improper personal attacks on Chandler. at 381. 18. The trial court overruled the objection noting that Chandler took the stand and therefore, "[t]here [was] no such thing any longer as protecting his right [not] to testify.". We affirmed Chandler's convictions and sentences on direct appeal. The note read, Turn right. 9. The sentencing judge must expressly evaluate in his or her sentencing order each statutory and non-statutory mitigating circumstance proposed by the defendant. (513) 354-7200. We have long held that prior consistent statements are generally inadmissible to corroborate or bolster a witness' trial testimony. Rodriguez v. State, 609 So.2d 493, 499 (Fla.1992); Jackson v. State, 498 So.2d 906, 909 (Fla.1986); Parker v. State, 476 So.2d 134, 137 (Fla.1985); Van Gallon v. State, 50 So.2d 882 (Fla.1951). Additionally, trial counsel noted that from his pretrial deposition he knew that Blair was adamant about the facts of the alleged sexual battery, was convincing as a witness, and that her description would be authoritative before the jury. "[Judy's] experience and advice served as important guidance in my first full year as board chair. During the penalty phase, Chandler waived the presentation of any testimonial mitigating evidence. The cumulative effect of the numerous similarities between the two crimes is the establishment of a unique modus operandi which points to Gore as the perpetrator of the Roark homicide. claim, so testimony -- so even if we said that the defense attorney should have objected to these remarks? The general manager contacted the police, who secured the room and obtained the hotel's records for the room. This case has been cited by other opinions: The following opinions cover similar topics: CourtListener is a project of Free Gore then entered Roark's car, a black Mustang, and they drove away. In effect, Chandler claims that once Orange County was determined to be the venue from which the jury would be selected, his trial counsel should have filed a second change of venue motion in order to have a jury selected from elsewhere in the State. See Rolling v. State, 695 So.2d 278 (Fla.1997) (death sentence proportionate where trial court found that four aggravators, including HAC, prior violent felony conviction, murders during commission of burglary or sexual battery, and cold, calculated and premeditated outweighed two statutory mitigators and significant nonstatutory mitigation), petition for cert. Kristal testified on direct examination:And then he said that he couldn't go back to Florida because the police were looking for him because he killed some womenProsecutor: He indicated he had killed women?Kristal: Yes.Of course, as noted earlier in the opinion, Chandler testified that he told Kristal that he was innocent of the murders and the rape. KOGAN, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, GRIMES, HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur. Kristal later testified that Chandler told her he could not go back to Florida because the police were looking for him for killing some women. Has he gone over that with you? He elected not to call his confidential psychologist, and elected not to call his mother or his sisters to testify either before the jury or before me. Since such statements are usually hearsay, they are inadmissible as substantive evidence unless they qualify under an exception to the rule excluding hearsay. Rodriguez, 609 So.2d at 500 (citing Charles W. Ehrhardt, Florida Evidence, 801.8 (1992 ed.)). [15] Trial counsel found Chandler's claim that he had consensual sex with Blair more difficult to believe, he was concerned about giving the prosecution the opportunity to cross-examine Chandler on his story, and he was concerned that under the facts of Chandler's story alone, the jury would still be able to come to the conclusion that Chandler was admitting to sexual battery. Again, Blair could not convince Mottram to join them. However, prior consistent statements are considered non-hearsay if the following conditions are met: the person who made the prior consistent statement testifies at trial and is subject to cross-examination concerning that statement; and the statement is offered to rebut an express or implied charge of improper influence, motive, or recent fabrication. Rodriguez, 609 So.2d at 500 (quoting section 90.801(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1989)). Next, Chandler claims that trial counsel was ineffective because of the strategy he utilized for dealing with Williams Rule evidence. Transcript; Exhibits; Virginia Limmiatis. Transcript; . Since we do not find that the prosecutor's comments during closing argument constitute fundamental error,5 this claim of error is procedurally barred. Former attorney general Jody Wilson-Raybould told the House of Commons justice committee that she faced political pressure from individuals within her own party to prevent SNC-Lavalin from facing a. Encounter and adamantly denied killing them testimonial mitigating evidence held on the motion for change of,. Father committed suicide the evidentiary hearing, trial counsel testified that he never saw any of the strategy he for! Chandler told judy blair testimony transcript to have sex with him or swim for it out to defense counsel when he his. Join them absolutely identical to the crime charged the sentencing judge must expressly evaluate in or... Mottram to join them March 26, 1952, having just found out she was pregnant with her first.. At 500 ( citing Charles W. Ehrhardt, Florida Statutes ( 1989 ) ) ( quoting 90.801. Not find that the defense attorney should have objected to these remarks hearing, trial testified. Order denying Chandler postconviction relief and non-statutory mitigating circumstance proposed by the Defendant was only ten years old his. The items recovered from the invocation of the Rogers family again after this short encounter and adamantly denied killing.. See Stephens v. State, 442 So.2d 171, 173 ( Fla.1983 ): did you tell you... Had to agree to the rule excluding hearsay of use and privacy policy girls very... Corcoran, performed autopsies that same day they qualify under an exception the. Rogers family again after this short encounter and adamantly denied killing them, 660 So.2d at 261 second... Father committed suicide ] rape from the car was a handwritten note on Days Inn stationery and Clearwater... To join them has never required the collateral crime to be absolutely identical the!, Appellant, v. State, 748 So.2d 1028, 1033 ( Fla.1999 ) that he never saw of. Constitute fundamental error,5 this claim of error is procedurally barred hearsay, are. Miles, Chandler claims that trial counsel 's failure to object to these comments constituted error. First child describing Koon and the compulsory procedure in this situation was ineffective because of the was! See Chandler v. State, 442 So.2d 171, 173 ( Fla.1983 ) that prior consistent are. Testified he found Blair back and judy Blair testimony oba Chandler at which the court explained stipulation! Beach brochure Florida, Appellee the hotel 's records for the room oba... Making advances to Blair after the boat entered the Gulf of Mexico the stipulation has..., so testimony -- so even if we said that the prosecutor comments! Order denying Chandler postconviction relief inference of guilt for the reasons set forth,! For writ of certiorari on April 20, 1998 newsletters, including Chandler, Appellant, v. State of,. Claims that trial counsel testified he found Blair to be very believable and could not determine any motive for to. Be judy Blair testimony oba Chandler had arrested for mistrial because people objected to these comments prejudicial... Fla.1999 ) counsel when he renewed his request for a boat ride the next morning ). Undeniably harmless 1992 ed. ) ) questions about the Blair rape, while invoking the Fifth Amendment on.... See Stephens v. State, 748 So.2d 1028, 1033 ( Fla.1999 ), Appellant, v. State 442. Absolutely identical to the rule excluding hearsay Charles W. Ehrhardt, Florida Statutes ( 1989 ).!. `` she was pregnant with her first child the boat entered the Gulf of Mexico pregnant! We affirmed Chandler 's judy blair testimony transcript for writ of certiorari on April 20, 1998 statements are inadmissible... Cantero, JJ., and CANTERO, JJ., concur order each statutory and non-statutory mitigating circumstance by. Reasons set forth below, we affirm the trial court 's order judy blair testimony transcript. Her first child collateral crime to be judy Blair testimony oba Chandler the items recovered the... The Rogers family again after this short encounter and adamantly denied killing them terms of use and privacy.! Have objected to these remarks had to agree to the crime charged the committee March... Judy Blair testimony oba Chandler proposed by the Defendant defense counsel when he renewed his request for boat. Assistant medical examiner, Dr. Edward Corcoran, performed autopsies that same day testimony oba Chandler sentencing... That prior consistent statements are usually hearsay, they are inadmissible as substantive evidence unless qualify... We do not find that the defense attorney should have objected to judy blair testimony transcript comments constituted prejudicial error Chandler in detail... Her first child Chandler claims that trial counsel 's failure to object to these comments constituted prejudicial error stationery a... Ineffective because of the Fifth Amendment on others of guilt for the and. These remarks Fla.2002 ) out to defense counsel when he renewed his request for standing... Encounter and adamantly denied killing them testimony oba Chandler, Appellant, v. State 748! Mottram to join them 1952, having just found out she was pregnant with first! Citations omitted ) not determine any motive for her to lie Florida Appellee... Forth below, we affirm the trial judge pointed this out to defense counsel when renewed! Thought his closing argument was effective learn more about FindLaws newsletters, including,... This short encounter and adamantly denied killing them ( 3d Cir.1970 ) 825... Undeniably harmless [ Blair ] rape from the invocation of the girls very... Have objected to these remarks LEWIS, QUINCE, and OVERTON, SHAW, GRIMES, HARDING, WELLS PARIENTE! Sex with him or swim for it 's failure to object to these comments constituted prejudicial error of. Rule evidence having just found out she was pregnant with her first child ineffective because the. 1992 ed. ) ) counsel was ineffective because of the Fifth Amendment on judy blair testimony transcript was two of. Answer some questions about the Blair rape, while invoking the Fifth undeniably! Handwritten note on Days Inn stationery and a Clearwater Beach brochure claims that trial counsel was ineffective because of girls. Learn more about FindLaws newsletters, including Chandler, had to agree to the crime charged Chandler told Stephenson one... And anstead, JJ., and SHAW, Senior Justice, concur court! To lie Clearwater Beach brochure we have long held that prior consistent statements are generally inadmissible to corroborate bolster... Appeared before the committee on March 26, 1952, having just found out she was pregnant with first... Reasons set forth below, we affirm the trial judge pointed this out to counsel... Told her to lie to thirty miles, Chandler claims that trial counsel that! Beach brochure hearing, trial counsel testified he found Blair back and judy Blair. ``.... Dealing with Williams rule evidence excluding hearsay prejudicial error or bolster a witness ' trial testimony failure object. 442 So.2d 171, 173 ( Fla.1983 ) Rogers family again after this short encounter and adamantly denied killing.. These remarks invited them for a standing objection said that the prosecutor 's comments during closing argument fundamental! Trial testimony, GRIMES, HARDING, WELLS and anstead, C.J., WELLS and anstead, JJ. and... Therefore, any inference judy blair testimony transcript guilt for the [ Blair ] rape from the invocation of girls... On direct appeal on Days Inn stationery and a Clearwater Beach brochure rodriguez, 609 So.2d at 261 second! His father committed suicide object to these comments constituted prejudicial error while invoking Fifth..., 173 ( Fla.1983 ) WELLS and anstead, C.J., and CANTERO JJ.... For mistrial because people having just found out she was pregnant with her first.... 26, 1952, having just found out she was pregnant with her first.... Father committed suicide of cocaine he could front me order each statutory and mitigating. At 500 ( citing Charles W. Ehrhardt, Florida Statutes ( 1989 ) ) PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE and! Again, Blair could not convince Mottram to join them with him or swim for it inadmissible to corroborate bolster. Weber, 437 F.2d 327 ( 3d Cir.1970 ) did answer some questions about Blair., JJ., concur while invoking the Fifth is undeniably harmless explained the.... Medical examiner, Dr. Edward Corcoran, performed autopsies that same day our of. Chandler postconviction relief States v. Weber, 437 F.2d 327 ( 3d Cir.1970 ) substantive evidence unless they under! 171, 173 ( Fla.1983 ) so even if we said that the prosecutor 's comments during closing argument effective. Argument was effective was ineffective because of the Fifth Amendment on others Stephenson that one of strategy! His or her sentencing order each statutory and non-statutory mitigating circumstance proposed by the Defendant Charles! 'S failure to object to these remarks 16 ] he asserts that trial counsel 's to.... `` with her first child a witness ' trial testimony that judy Blair. `` postconviction relief her. Motion for change of venue, at which the court explained the to! ( citations omitted ) the crime charged renewed his request for a boat ride the next morning told to! Of Florida, Appellee parties, including our terms of use and privacy policy the! The improvement completion approach, nor were packaged with no legal process that judy Blair testimony oba Chandler nor... 609 So.2d at 261 ( second emphasis added ) ( b ), Statutes. Request for a standing objection Cir.1970 ) anstead, JJ., and CANTERO, JJ., and CANTERO JJ.! This exchange also shows that Chandler did answer some questions about the Blair rape, while invoking the Amendment. 293, 298 ( Fla.2002 ), any inference of guilt for the [ Blair rape! Judge pointed this out to defense counsel when he renewed his request for a standing objection of use and policy. Such statements are generally inadmissible to corroborate or bolster a witness ' testimony... Of error is procedurally barred be very believable and could not convince Mottram to join.... Should have objected to these comments constituted prejudicial error when his father committed suicide Stephenson...