Opinions are provided based on the year the opinion was released. Opinions are made available online on this website from September 24, 1999 to the present. The Florida Supreme Court also has informat

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » Florida » Florida Supreme Court » 2011 » Opinions are provided based on the year the opinion was released. Opinions are made available online on this website from September 24, 1999 to the present. The Florida Supreme Court also has informat

State: Florida

Court: Supreme Court

Docket No: Opinions

Case Date: 01/06/2011

Preview:Supreme Court of Florida
____________ No. SC05-830 ____________ LEONARDO FRANQUI, Appellant, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. [January 6, 2011] PER CURIAM. Leonardo Franqui appeals an order of the circuit court denying his motion to vacate his conviction of first-degree murder and sentence of death filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We have jurisdiction under article V, section 3(b)(1), Florida Constitution. For the reasons expressed below, we affirm the circuit court`s order denying postconviction relief. I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY A. Background and the Direct Appeal Proceedings Leonardo Franqui was convicted of the December 6, 1991, murder of Raul Lopez in Medley, Florida. We affirmed Franqui`s conviction for the first-degree

murder of Lopez and the resulting death sentence in Franqui v. State, 699 So. 2d 1312 (Fla. 1997). Franqui now appeals the denial of his first motion, as subsequently amended, for postconviction relief filed in 1999 under rule 3.850. An evidentiary hearing was held on two of the claims and relief was summarily denied on the remaining claims. The relevant circumstances of the crime and trial are set forth in the Court`s opinion on direct appeal as follows: Leonardo Franqui and codefendants Pablo San Martin and Pablo Abreu were charged with one count of first-degree murder, two counts of attempted first-degree murder with a firearm, one count of attempted robbery with a firearm, two counts of grand theft, and one count of unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense. Prior to trial, codefendant Abreu negotiated a plea with the State and subsequently testified against Franqui during the penalty phase of the proceedings. The following facts were established at the trial of Franqui and San Martin. Danilo Cabanas, Sr., and his son, Danilo Cabanas, Jr., operated a check-cashing business in Medley, Florida. On Fridays, Cabanas Sr. would pick up cash from his bank for the business. After Cabanas Sr. was robbed during a bank trip, Cabanas Jr. and a friend, Raul Lopez, regularly accompanied Cabanas Sr. to the bank. The Cabanases were each armed with a 9mm handgun, and Lopez was armed with a .32 caliber gun. On Friday, December 6, 1991, the Cabanases and Lopez drove in separate vehicles to the bank. Cabanas Sr. withdrew about $25,000 in cash and returned to the Chevrolet Blazer driven by his son. Lopez followed in his Ford pickup truck. Shortly thereafter, the Cabanases were cut off and boxed in at an intersection by two Chevrolet Suburbans. Two occupants of the front Suburban, wearing masks, got out and began shooting at the Cabanases. When Cabanas Sr. returned fire, the assailants returned to their vehicle and fled. Cabanas Jr. saw one person, also masked, exit the rear Suburban.

-2-

Following the gunfight, Lopez was found outside his vehicle with a bullet wound in his chest. He died at a hospital shortly thereafter. One bullet hole was found in the passenger door of Lopez`s pickup. The Suburbans, subsequently determined to have been stolen, were found abandoned. Both Suburbans suffered bullet damage--one was riddled with thirteen bullet holes. The Cabanases` Blazer had ten bullet holes. Franqui`s confession was admitted at trial. When police initially questioned Franqui, he denied any knowledge of the Lopez shooting. However, when confronted with photographs of the bank and the Suburbans, he confessed. Franqui explained that he had learned from Fernando Fernandez about the Cabanases` check cashing business and that for three to five months he and his codefendants had planned to rob the Cabanases. He described the use of the stolen Suburbans, the firearms used, and other details of the plan. Franqui admitted that he had a .357 or .38 revolver. Codefendant San Martin had a 9mm semiautomatic, which at times jammed, and codefendant Abreu had a Tech-9 9mm semiautomatic, which resembles a small machine gun. Franqui stated that San Martin and Abreu drove in front of the Cabanases and Franqui pulled alongside them so they could not escape. Once the gunfight began, Franqui claimed that the pickup rammed the Cabanases` Blazer and Lopez opened fire. Franqui then returned fire in Lopez`s direction. San Martin refused to sign a formal written statement to police. However, San Martin orally confessed and, in addition to relating his own role in the incident, detailed Franqui`s role in the planning and execution of the crime. San Martin admitted initiating the robbery attempt and shooting at the Blazer but not shooting at Lopez`s pickup . He placed Franqui in proximity to Lopez`s pickup, although he could not tell if Franqui had fired his gun during the incident. San Martin initially claimed that the weapons used in the crime were thrown off a Miami Beach bridge, but subsequently stated that he had thrown the weapons into a river near his home, where they were later recovered by the police. San Martin did not testify at trial, but his oral confession was admitted into evidence over Franqui`s objection. Franqui, 699 So. 2d at 1315-16. The jury found Franqui guilty as charged and recommended death by a nine-to-three vote. The trial court followed the jury`s

-3-

recommendation after finding and weighing four aggravators against two nonstatutory mitigators. The aggravators found by the trial court were: (1) Franqui was previously convicted of prior violent felonies; (2) the murder was committed during the course of an attempted robbery; merged with (3) the murder was committed for pecuniary gain; and (4) the murder was committed in a cold, calculated, and premeditated manner. The court found no statutory mitigators, but found two nonstatutory mitigating circumstances: (1) Franqui had a poor family background and deprived childhood; and (2) Franqui was a caring husband, father, brother, and provider.1 See Franqui, 699 So. 2d at 1316. Franqui appealed his convictions and sentences to this Court.2 In the direct appeal, we held that although the trial court erred in admitting codefendant San

1. Franqui was also sentenced to life imprisonment on the two attempted murder charges, fifteen years for the attempted robbery and second grand theft, and five years for the first grand theft and unlawful firearm possession, all sentences to run consecutively. 2. On direct appeal, Franqui raised four issues and six subissues in his initial brief. He subsequently raised two supplemental issues, which the Court also decided in the direct appeal. The issues considered on direct appeal were as follows: (1) the trial court abused its discretion in failing to grant Franqui`s motions for severance in light of the introduction, at the joint trial, of his codefendant`s post-arrest confession which incriminated Franqui; (2) the trial court erred in failing to exclude portions of Franqui`s robbery confession for which the State failed to prove the corpus delicti; (3) the trial court abused its discretion by prohibiting voir dire examination of the jury as to specific mitigating circumstances and in denying access to the jury questionnaire; (4) the trial court erred in sentencing the defendant to death, a disproportionate, cruel, and unusual punishment under the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth amendments; (4A) the -4-

Martin`s written confession during the penalty phase of the trial, the error was harmless in light of Franqui`s own confession and other extensive evidence of guilt. Id. at 1328. We reversed the two attempted murder convictions on the authority of Valentine v. State, 688 So. 2d 313 (Fla. 1996) (citing State v. Gray, 654 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 1995) (holding that the crime of attempted felony murder no longer existed in Florida)). Franqui, 699 So. 2d at 1323.3 We affirmed the remaining convictions and sentences.

trial court erred in finding the murder was cold, calculated, and premeditated (CCP); (4B) the CCP instruction given to the jury was unconstitutionally vague, ambiguous, and misleading; (4C) the trial court erred in failing to credit the nonstatutory mitigating factors that Franqui had marginal, if not retarded, intelligence and that he was brain-damaged, in rejecting impaired capacity and age as statutory mitigating factors, and in refusing to instruct the jury on the latter; (4D) death is a disproportionate and unconstitutional penalty in light of the circumstances of this case; (4E) the trial court erred in prohibiting Franqui from informing the jury of the court`s power to impose consecutive sentences and the possibility of lifelong imprisonment as an alternative to death, as well as in failing to so instruct the jury upon its own inquiry; (4F) the death penalty is unconstitutional on its face and as applied to Franqui under the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth amendments, as well as the natural law; (supplemental claim 1) the trial court erred in granting the State`s motion in limine and denying Franqui the right to cross-examine about the substance of an exculpatory statement made after the confession that the State introduced in its case-in-chief; and (supplemental claim 2) Franqui`s convictions on counts II and III must be reversed due to the likelihood that they were for the nonexistent crime of attempted felony murder. 3. The holding in State v. Gray was superseded by enactment of a statute creating the offense of attempted felony murder. We recently explained: The Legislature in 1996, in response to our decision in Gray, enacted section 782.051, which created the offense of Felony causing bodily injury. See ch. 96-359,

Download Opinions are provided based on the year the opinion was released. Opinions are m