Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Ian Deco Lightbourne - Florida Death Row

  1. #1
    Guest
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,534

    Ian Deco Lightbourne - Florida Death Row




    Facts of the Crime:

    On May 1, 1981, Ian Deco Lightbourne was convicted and sentenced to death for the first-degree murder of Nancy O’Farrell. According to the facts of the February 18, 1981 indictment, the murder occurred on the night of January 17, 1981. Lightbourne pried open and broke the window screen of O’Farrell’s home. He took some of the victim’s belongings, which included a necklace, a small silver bank and some money.

    Sources revealed that Lightbourne admitted to surprising O’Farrell with the intrusion and forced her to submit to sexual relations. Since he knew the victim personally, Lightbourne killed O’Farrell in order to avoid identification and arrest. Lightbourne shot O’Farrell on the left side of her face with a .25-caliber automatic pistol; a pillow was placed over O’Farrell’s face before the shot was fired. Medical experts claimed the victim bled to death.

    According to trial sources, Lightbourne was discovered not long after the murder. Lightbourne was pulled over by a police officer, who was responding to an earlier anonymous phone call reporting a suspicious vehicle – the same one driven by Lightbourne. Once the officer discovered the .25-caliber pistol during a pat search, the officer arrested Lightbourne. During his indictment, medical experts testified that traces of sperm were found in the victim’s vagina and pubic hair was found at the scene of the crime that matched and connected Lightbourne to O’Farrell’s murder.

    Lightbourne was sentenced to death in Marion County on May 1, 1981.

  2. #2
    Senior Member CnCP Legend JLR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    2,740
    Case Information:

    On 07/02/81, Lightbourne filed a Direct Appeal to the Florida Supreme Court. There were numerous issues raised. First, Lightbourne claimed that the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss the indictment because the aggravating circumstances in the sentencing stage of capital felony cases ought to be alleged in the indictment in order for there to be jurisdiction for the court to impose death. Second, he claimed that the trial court erred in the unconstitutional imposition of his death sentence as it allegedly terminated judicial discretion at the sentencing of a capital felony case; the statutes on mitigating and aggravating circumstances are stated ambiguously, and the death sentence itself violated Florida’s death penalty statute. Third, Lightbourne claimed that the court erred by permitting Chavers and Carson’s testimony to take place, which was a violation of his privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments of the Constitution. Fourth, Lightbourne argued the court erred by denying his motion to suppress said items, which legitimated the officer’s pat-down, and stop and seizure. Fifth, Lightbourne claimed the court erred by admitting into evidence the police interrogation video, which showed him waiving his Miranda rights twice. Sixth, Lightbourne claimed that the trial court erred by denying his motion to impose sanctions as a result of the state’s failure to properly notify the defendant of a deposition to be taken of a listed state witness. Finally, he claimed that the court erred by imposing the death sentence where the more mitigating circumstances outweighed the aggravating circumstances. On 09/15/83, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed Lightbourne’s conviction and death sentence.

    On 12/23/83, Lightbourne filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court, which was denied on 02/21/84.

    On 05/31/85, Lightbourne filed a 3.850 Motion to the Circuit Court, which was denied on that same day.

    On 06/03/85, Lightbourne filed a 3.850 Appeal to the Florida Supreme Court, which was affirmed on 06/03/85 (the same day as the file date). The mandate was issued on 06/28/85.

    Lightbourne filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus to the United States District Court, Middle District on 06/03/85, which was denied more than a year later on 08/20/86.

    The United States Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of Lightbourne’s Habeas relief on 09/17/86.

    On 07/26/88, Lightbourne filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari, which was denied on 10/31/88. During the process of filing this petition, The Court recalled the mandate and withdrew his order denying rehearing on 04/20/88. On 04/28/88, the order was denied, but the mandate was issued.

    The Florida Supreme Court received Lightbourne’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus on 01/27/89, which was denied on 07/20/89. At the time of his petitioning, Lightbourne was filing for a motion for stay and counsel pro hac vice.

    On 01/30/89, Lightbourne filed a 3.850 Motion to the Circuit Court, which was denied on 01/31/89.

    Lightbourne filed a 3.850 Appeal to the Florida Supreme Court on 01/31/89. The Court granted a stay and execution was pending further notice. On 07/20/89, the Court remanded for evidentiary hearing on one issue, which was the self-incriminating evidence provided by Lightbourne’s jailhouse cellmates. On 10/23/89, the Court denied Lightbourne’s motion for a rehearing.

    On 01/19/90, Lightbourne filed for a Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court, which was denied on 03/19/90.

    On 07/24/91, an evidentiary hearing was held at the Circuit Court. The 3.850 Motion then was denied on 06/12/92.

    Then, on 08/24/92, Lightbourne filed a 3.850 Appeal to the Florida Supreme Court, which was affirmed on 06/16/94. A rehearing was denied and a mandate was issued on 10/26/94. During the petitioning process, Lightbourne filed numerous motions for an extension of time.

    On 11/07/94, Lightbourne filed a 3.850 Motion to the Circuit Court, which was denied on 06/19/96. The rehearing was denied on 11/15/96.

    On 01/28/95, Lightbourne filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court, which was denied on 03/27/95.

    Lightbourne filed a 3.850 Appeal to the Florida Supreme Court on 12/13/96. The denial was reversed on 07/08/99. While waiting for his appeal, Lightbourne filed for various motions to extend time and for an order for record supplementation. A mandate was issued on 08/13/99.

    On 12/02/99, an evidentiary hearing was held at the Florida Supreme Court. The 3.850 Motion was denied on 02/26/01.

    On 03/12/01, Lightbourne filed a 3.850 Appeal to the Florida Supreme Court. The prior denial of the motion was denied on 01/16/03. A rehearing was denied on 03/21/03 and a mandate was issued on 04/21/03.
    On 06/17/03, Lightbourne filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court, which was denied on 11/10/03.

    Lightbourne filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus to the Florida Supreme Court on 06/18/03, which was denied on 08/17/04. The rehearing was denied on 11/16/04.

    On 02/14/05, Lightbourne filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court, which was denied on 06/20/05.

    On 03/24/06, Lightbourne’s 3.850 Motion was filed to the Circuit Court. On 05/02/06, the trial court issued an order, denying Lightbourne’s 3.850 Motion without an evidentiary hearing. Lightbourne raised the following two issues, which were denied by the lower court: (1) counsel notification issues and (2) the demand for lethal injection.

    On 06/22/06, Lightbourne filed a 3.850 Appeal to the Florida Supreme Court. On 12/14/06, Lightbourne’s case was relinquished to the Circuit Court regarding the legality of Florida’s lethal injection procedures. On 04/16/07, the Court affirmed the trial court’s denial of Lightbourne’s 3.850 Motion.

    On 12/14/06, Lightbourne filed a petition seeking to invoke the Florida Supreme Court’s All Writs jurisdiction. The Florida Supreme Court relinquished jurisdiction to the Circuit Court on 12/14/06. On 12/14/16, jurisdiction was relinquished to the Circuit Court in the All Writs Petition filed by Lightbourne in the Florida Supreme Court. The petition was denied 09/10/07 in an order that also terminated the temporary stay of execution ordered by the Florida Supreme Court on 07/22/07. On 11/01/07, the Florida Supreme Court issued an opinion affirmed the circuit court’s denial of Lightbourne’s All Writs Petition. On 11/05/07, Lightbourne filed a Motion for rehearing which was denied on 11/07/07.

    On 04/03/08, Lightbourne filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari in the United States Supreme Court. This petition was denied on 05/19/08.

    Lightbourne filed a 3.851 Motion in the State Circuit Court on 11/29/10. This case is currently pending.

  3. #3
    Administrator Helen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    20,875
    Death row inmate in Ocala court Friday, discussion involved DNA sample, new technology

    By April Warren
    The Ocala Star-Banner

    A judge has allowed the taking of a DNA sample from a death row inmate so it can be compared with a male profile recently found when the victim's rape kit from 30 years ago was tested using modern technology.

    The judge didn't allow the sample to be taken just yet, however, allowing Ian Lightbourne's defense team to file an appeal to the Supreme Court on the complex matter, where case law is limited, if it exists at all.

    Lightborne, a native of the Bahamas, was 21 years old when he was sentenced to death in 1981 by former Circuit Judge William Swigert.

    At trial, the state presented evidence that Lightbourne raped and killed Nancy O'Farrell, 41, in her southeast Ocala home earlier that year.

    Lightbourne surprised O'Farrell when she came out of her shower and raped her before he shot her in the head with a .25 caliber pistol.

    O'Farrell's family pioneered Ocala's thoroughbred horse breeding industry. Lightbourne had been a former employee of the O'Farrell family's Ocala Stud farm.

    Lightbourne, who has maintained his innocence, is now 55 and has spent more time in custody than out of it.

    On Friday, Circuit Judge Robert Hodges presided over a hearing where the state was asking the court to allow it to take a fresh DNA sample so they could compare it to the male profile they found when they sent trial evidence to a lab for testing.

    The evidence that was sent was the vaginal wash taken from the victim during the autopsy, which was later placed in evidence at trial. Earlier this year, the judge allowed a portion of that evidence to be tested using modern technology.

    Roseanne Eckert, of the office of capital collateral regional counsel, told the judge the court no longer has jurisdiction over the case and has no authority to authorize the taking of her client's DNA because there is no controversy or appeal before the court that requires its attention.

    Assistant State Attorney Rock Hooker told the judge the state knows that when the governor signs Lightbourne's death warrant, the state will be asked to perform any additional DNA testing that can be done in the case before execution.

    "We're trying to move the case forward and this is something that has to be done before he can be executed," Hooker said.

    "I think the state is putting the cart before the horse on this matter, respectfully," Eckert said during her argument.

    Eckert presented legal precedent to the judge that stated when a defendant is sentenced to a life prison term the court would not retain jurisdiction because the sentence is an indeterminate amount of time.

    "There's no basis to ask this court to do anything at this time," Eckert said.

    She said her client might lose many of his rights when sentenced to prison, but he does not lose all of them.

    But Hooker disagreed with Eckert's analysis, arguing that Lightbourne's penalty is still pending.

    "The defendant has been sentenced to death and that has not yet been executed," Hooker said.

    Hooker also mentioned that Lightbourne has maintained his innocence and while the state is unwavering in believing he committed the crime, he wondered why Lightbourne wouldn't want to have the test performed.

    "Now we have technology that can invariably pinpoint who left that semen," said Scott Browne, assistant attorney general, who is aiding Hooker in the case and participated via phone during Friday's hearing.

    Browne said he has had a case where a death warrant was signed and the DNA testing had to be done in the 11th hour before execution. He also pointed out that the intrusion of collecting the swab is a very minimal cheek rub.

    Hodges acknowledged that death penalty cases are often treated differently, differentiating them from life sentences, which was the legal precedent set out by Eckert.

    "The courts have never said we think finality is more important than getting it right in a death penalty case," Hodges said.

    In the end, Hodges granted the state's motion, but did not allow the DNA collection, giving the defense time to appeal his decision.

    He did acknowledge, however, that Lightbourne is in the custody of the state and that he has no control over any rule that the Department of Corrections might have in place to collect a swab on their own.

    http://www.ocala.com/article/2014120...ws09?p=1&tc=pg
    "I realize this may sound harsh, but as a father and former lawman, I really don't care if it's by lethal injection, by the electric chair, firing squad, hanging, the guillotine or being fed to the lions."
    - Oklahoma Rep. Mike Christian

    "There are some people who just do not deserve to live,"
    - Rev. Richard Hawke

    “There are lots of extremely smug and self-satisfied people in what would be deemed lower down in society, who also deserve to be pulled up. In a proper free society, you should be allowed to make jokes about absolutely anything.”
    - Rowan Atkinson

  4. #4
    Administrator Helen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    20,875
    Judge issues written order on DNA issue in Lightbourne death penalty case

    By April Warren
    The Ocala Star-Banner

    The judge presiding over a decades-old death penalty case where DNA has become a point of contention between both sides has issued a written order that strikes down an argument made by the defense against DNA collection.

    On Dec. 5, attorneys for Ian Lightbourne, 55, filed into court arguing that the state's request to take a new DNA sample from their client should be thrown out because the trial court, which is being asked to rule on the DNA matter, no longer has jurisdiction over the case. Therefore, the defense argued, Circuit Judge Robert Hodges has no authority to allow for the DNA collection.

    During the hearing, the defense presented legal precedent that stated when defendants are sentenced to a life prison term the trial court no longer has jurisdiction because the sentence is an indeterminate amount of time.

    Lightbourne was sentenced to death in 1981 by former Circuit Judge William Swigert. Prosecutors presented trial evidence that Lightbourne raped and fatally shot Nancy O'Farrell, 41, in her southeast Ocala home earlier that year.

    Assistant State Attorney Rock Hooker told Hodges during the December hearing that the state knows that when the governor signs Lightbourne's death warrant, the state will be required to then perform any DNA testing necessary before an execution can occur. The state is trying to be efficient and get the ball rolling, according to Hooker. The state already tested the rape kit and found a male profile, which they hope to compare to Lightbourne's DNA.

    At the end of that hearing, Hodges granted the state's motion to collect the DNA, but ruled that the collection could not occur just yet, allowing for the defense to appeal his decision.

    Now, in a recently issued written order detailing his verbal ruling, Hodges refutes the defense's claim he no longer has jurisdiction over the case. He details in the order continuous litigation in the case, which has been ongoing since 2011.

    “Due to the ongoing litigation, the court finds that it retains jurisdiction in this case to rule on the state's motion,” Hodges wrote. “The defendant in this case has engaged in ongoing discovery and litigation regarding his sentence and the state's efforts to carry out that sentence.”

    Hodges noted that Florida law allows for defendants to ask a judge post-sentencing to examine physical evidence for DNA. While no state law exists to clarify whether or not the state has a right to ask for such testing, no Florida law bars prosecutors from conducting the testing, according to Hodges.

    Florida law does allow the state to collect DNA from certain incarcerated offenders for a statewide DNA database.

    “The state has a great interest in comparing this DNA with that of the defendant to either include or exclude the defendant as being the source of the discovered DNA,” Hodges wrote.

    In the written order, Hodges reiterated his verbal ruling granting the state's request to take the DNA sample by rubbing a swab around the inside of Lightbourne's cheek. Hodges also reiterated that the DNA collection is on a temporary hold, allowing the defense the chance to appeal.

    http://www.ocala.com/article/2014122...ws09?p=1&tc=pg
    "I realize this may sound harsh, but as a father and former lawman, I really don't care if it's by lethal injection, by the electric chair, firing squad, hanging, the guillotine or being fed to the lions."
    - Oklahoma Rep. Mike Christian

    "There are some people who just do not deserve to live,"
    - Rev. Richard Hawke

    “There are lots of extremely smug and self-satisfied people in what would be deemed lower down in society, who also deserve to be pulled up. In a proper free society, you should be allowed to make jokes about absolutely anything.”
    - Rowan Atkinson

  5. #5
    Administrator Aaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    New Jersey, unfortunately
    Posts
    4,382
    Another Duval County death row inmate loses appeal

    TALLAHASSEE, Fla. - After issuing another batch of 10 rulings Friday, the Florida Supreme Court this week rejected a total of 40 death-penalty appeals on similar legal grounds.

    The 40 appeals all were filed on behalf of Death Row inmates who received their sentences before June 2002, though the Supreme Court’s decision to release four large batches of rulings in a week was highly unusual.

    The appeals stemmed from a 2016 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in a case known as Hurst v. Florida and a subsequent Florida Supreme Court decision.

    The 2016 U.S. Supreme Court ruling found Florida's death-penalty sentencing system was unconstitutional because it gave too much authority to judges, instead of juries.

    The subsequent Florida Supreme Court ruling said juries must unanimously agree on critical findings before judges can impose death sentences and must unanimously recommend the death penalty.

    But the Florida Supreme Court made the new sentencing requirements apply to cases since June 2002.

    That is when the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling known as Ring v. Arizona that was a premise for striking down Florida's death-penalty sentencing system in 2016. In each of the cases this week, the Death Row inmates had been sentenced to death before the Ring decision and argued that the new unanimity requirements should also apply to their cases.

    The inmates who lost their appeals Friday were Richard Harold Anderson in a Hillsborough County case; Charles William Finney in a Hillsborough County case; Kenneth Hartley in a Duval County case; Sonny Ray Jeffries in an Orange County case; William H. Kelley in a Highlands County case; Ian Deco Lightbourne in a Marion County case; Robert D. Morris in a Polk County case; Kenneth Allen Stewart in a Hillsborough County case; George James Trepal in a Polk County case; and Melvin Trotter in a Manatee County case.

    https://www.news4jax.com/news/florid...e-loses-appeal
    Don't ask questions, just consume product and then get excited for next products.

    "They will hurt you. They will hurt your grandma, these people. The root cause of this is there's no discipline in the homes, they don't go to school, you know, they live off the government, no personal accountability, and they just beat people up for no reason, and it's disgusting." - Former Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters

  6. #6
    Administrator Heidi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    33,217
    Supreme Court rejects death penalty appeals

    TALLAHASSEE, Fla. - The Florida Supreme Court on Thursday rejected appeals by three Death Row inmates in decades-old cases, including the 1991 murder of a Fort Pierce police officer.

    The rulings were part of a long line of similar decisions in cases rooted in a 2016 U.S. Supreme Court decision.

    In one of Thursday’s cases, justices turned down an appeal by Death Row inmate Billy Leon Kearse, who was convicted in the murder of Fort Pierce police officer Danny Parrish during a traffic stop, according to court records.

    In another case, justices rejected an appeal by Death Row inmate Stephen Todd Booker, who was convicted in the 1977 murder of 94-year-old Lorine Demoss Harmon in Alachua County.

    In the third case, justices denied an appeal by Ian Deco Lightbourne, who was convicted in the 1981 sexual battery and murder of Nancy O’Farrell in Marion County.

    Each of the appeals related to a 2016 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in a case known as Hurst v. Florida and a subsequent Florida Supreme Court decision.

    The 2016 U.S. Supreme Court ruling found Florida's death-penalty sentencing system was unconstitutional because it gave too much authority to judges, instead of juries.

    The subsequent Florida Supreme Court ruling said juries must unanimously agree on critical findings before judges can impose death sentences and must unanimously recommend the death penalty.

    But the Florida Supreme Court made the new sentencing requirements apply to cases since June 2002. That is when the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling known as Ring v. Arizona that was a premise for striking down Florida's death-penalty sentencing system in 2016.

    In each of the cases Thursday, the Death Row inmates had been sentenced to death before the Ring decision and argued that the new requirements should also apply to their cases. But the Supreme Court said the Hurst requirements should not retroactively apply to the inmates.

    https://www.news4jax.com/news/florid...enalty-appeals
    An uninformed opponent is a dangerous opponent.

    "Y'all be makin shit up" ~ Markeith Loyd

  7. #7
    Administrator Moh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    13,014
    In today's orders, the United States Supreme Court DENIED Lightbourne's certiorari petition.

    Lower Ct: Supreme Court of Florida
    Case Numbers: (SC17-837)
    Decision Date: January 26, 2018

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/search....c/18-5012.html

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •