Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: Mark Anthony Poole - Florida Death Row

  1. #11
    Administrator Moh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    13,014
    High Court Affirms Death Sentence in Beating Death, Rape of Lakeland Couple

    By Suzie Schottelkotte
    THE LEDGER

    BARTOW - The Florida Supreme Court affirmed Thursday the death sentence of convicted murderer Mark Anthony Poole, who beat a 24-year-old Lakeland man to death with a tire iron in 2001 while raping his pregnant fiancée.

    In a 36-page opinion, the state's high court rejected each of Poole's arguments to have the death sentence overturned. The justices said the brutality of the crime warrants the death penalty, based on other cases in which the court has upheld a death sentence.

    They ruled the Circuit Court didn't err on issues relating to jury selection, the admissibility of evidence and statements made by the prosecutor during the trial.

    Poole, 51, was convicted in 2005 of first-degree murder, attempted first-degree murder, sexual battery, armed burglary and armed robbery, and the jury that found him guilty voted unanimously to recommend that he be sentenced to death.

    Circuit Judge J. Dale Durrance followed that recommendation, but the Florida Supreme Court overturned Poole's death sentence in 2008 because his criminal history was improperly discussed during the penalty phase of his trial.

    The Circuit Court in Bartow convened a new jury to hear evidence and consider an appropriate sentence for Poole.

    In August 2011, that jury voted 11-1 to recommend that Poole be put to death for the murder of Noah Scott, and Circuit Judge J. Michael Hunter imposed that sentence. On Thursday, the Supreme Court upheld Hunter's ruling.

    In his order, Hunter wrote he "can only imagine the fear and pain experienced by Mr. Scott during the final moments of his life as he attempted to stop the brutal rape of his pregnant fiancée."

    While Scott and his 18-year-old fiancée slept in their home at the Orangewood Village Mobile Home Park on North Florida Avenue in Lakeland on Oct. 12, 2001, Poole broke in and attacked the woman.

    The Ledger is not publishing the woman's name, in keeping with its policy of not identifying victims of most sexual assaults.

    When Scott tried to defend his fiancée, Poole hit him repeatedly in the head with a tire iron, all the while continuing his savage attack on the woman. Scott would die from 13 blows to his head, some deep enough to fracture his skull.

    When the woman fought back, Poole beat her with the same tire iron, slicing away parts of her fingers in the attack.

    Poole took some video games and game equipment from the home, and as he was leaving, he returned to the bedroom and briefly fondled the woman, telling her "thank you."

    After he left, the woman managed to crawl from the bed to call 911. A doctor testified she would have died if she hadn't been pregnant because her body had more fluid than she normally would have.

    The couple's son was successfully delivered months later.

    http://www.theledger.com/article/201...1410?p=1&tc=pg

  2. #12
    Administrator Moh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    13,014
    In today's orders, the United States Supreme Court declined to review Poole's petition for certiorari.

    Lower Ct: Supreme Court of Florida
    Case Nos.: (SC11-1846)
    Decision Date: June 26, 2014
    Rehearing Denied: November 20, 2014

    http://www.supremecourt.gov/search.a...es/14-8462.htm

  3. #13
    Administrator Helen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    20,875
    Poole eligible for new sentencing hearing

    By Suzie Schottelkotte
    The Ledger

    BARTOW — Convicted murderer Mark Anthony Poole, who’s spent the past 12 years on Florida’s death row, is getting a new sentencing hearing.

    He’s among four death row inmates from Polk County who will be re-sentenced based on a January 2016 Florida Supreme Court ruling that led to changes in the state’s death penalty process.

    Poole, 54, was convicted in 2005 for the brutal home-invasion murder of Noah Scott, 24, who was sleeping in October 2001 when Poole broke into the Lakeland mobile home he shared with his pregnant fiancee. She awoke to Poole raping her with a pillow over her face, demanding to know where the money was.

    When she begged for her life, Poole repeatedly struck her with a tire iron, severing two of her fingers. Scott tried to stop him, prompting Poole turned the tire iron on him, hitting him multiple times in the head and rendering him unconscious, according to police reports.

    Poole grabbed an armful of video games and gaming equipment, and before leaving, he returned to the bedroom, touched the woman’s vaginal area and said ’Thank you.”

    She was jolted awake the next morning by her alarm, and she called 911. Her fiance’s body was found in the hallway of an adjacent bedroom, and she was taken to the hospital. According to police reports, some of the gashes in her head were so deep, her skull was exposed.

    DNA in the victim linked Pool to the crime, along with other evidence, according to court records. The victim later gave birth to a baby boy.

    The Circuit Court jury that convicted Poole in 2005 also voted unanimously to recommend that he be sentenced to death, and Circuit Judge J. Dale Durrance followed that recommendation.

    In 2008, the Florida Supreme Court overturned his death sentence on grounds that prosecutors erred when asking witnesses about Poole’s prior criminal history.

    Three years later, a different jury recommended 11-1 that Poole should return to death row, and Circuit Judge J. Michael Hunter imposed that sentence.

    It’s the 11-1 vote that is getting Poole a new sentencing hearing now.

    When the Florida Supreme Court ruled in January 2016 that the state’s death penalty process was unconstitutional, the state Legislature adopted new standards requiring that jurors must decide whether prosecutors have proven each reason put forth in support of a death sentence. Until now, those decisions had been left up to the judge.

    In subsequent action, Florida legislators also determined that the jury vote on a recommendation of death must be unanimous, which is a higher standard than the simple majority that had been in place.

    Finally, the Supreme Court ruled that these standards were retroactive to June 2002, when a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court put states on notice that juries, not judges, had to determine whether prosecutors proved their reasons for imposing a death penalty.

    As a result, Florida’s death row inmates whose sentences were affirmed by the Florida Supreme Court after June 2002, and whose juries weren’t unanimous, are entitled to a new sentencing hearing.

    Others in Polk County who will be resentenced are Thomas Rigterink, Nelson Serrano and Thomas Woodel.

    Condemned murderer Leon Davis, who set two women on fire during the robbery of a Lake Wales insurance office, won’t be resentenced because the jury voted unanimously for death.

    Tavares Wright waived a jury trial in 2005 for the abduction and murder of two Lakeland cousins in a citrus grove in April 2000. Since Wright waived a jury, he’s not eligible for a new hearing.

    Unrelated to the resentencing matter, Poole has an evidentiary hearing July 10 before Circuit Judge Jalal Harb on a motion for a new trial.

    http://www.theledger.com/news/201707...encing-hearing
    "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. #14
    Administrator Moh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    13,014
    Florida Supreme Court says unanimous jury not needed for death penalty in major reversal

    By Emily L. Mahoney
    The Tampa Bay Times

    TALLAHASSEE — In a stunning reversal of a previous decision, the Florida Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a unanimous jury should not be required to sentence someone to death. Federal law, and every state that has the death penalty except Alabama, require unanimous juries for the death penalty, rather than a simple majority.

    Florida law used to only require that a majority of the jury make a recommendation to the judge on whether to sentence a defendant to die. The judge then issues a final ruling based on that recommendation. But after a decision by the Florida Supreme Court in 2016 struck down that model in a case called Hurst v. State, the Legislature changed its law to mandate a unanimous jury.

    But Thursday’s ruling opens the door for state lawmakers, if they wish, to return Florida to one of the few states that don’t require a unanimous jury to impose the death penalty.

    “It is no small matter for one Court to conclude that a predecessor Court has clearly erred,” the majority opinion of four justices states. But, “in this case we cannot escape the conclusion that ... our Court in Hurst v. State got it wrong.”

    In the majority opinion, the justices wrote that their own court’s prior decision was made in error, because the justices at the time had misinterpreted a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that found Florida’s death sentencing process unconstitutional.

    The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling did not, in fact, mean that a jury had to unanimously sentence a person to death, they wrote. Rather, that court only said that a jury had to unanimously find that a defendant was eligible for the death penalty, because of so-called “aggravating factors,” such as if the crime was “especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel” or was committed against a child under 12.

    But the final decision of whether a defendant should be sentenced to die does not require unanimity, Florida’s highest court said.

    What does this decision mean?

    For one, it means the man, Mark Anthony Poole, who brought this case to the Supreme Court after he was sentenced to death with only the majority of a jury, will once again get the death penalty, after his sentence was previously vacated. He has been convicted of first degree murder, attempted first degree murder, sexual battery, armed burglary and armed robbery.

    There are 157 death row cases where the person was eligible for a new sentence under the 2016 ruling. Since then, those cases have been going through various stages of re-sentencing, according to the Washington-based Death Penalty Information Center.

    Thursday’s decision could strip some of those prisoners of rights they were promised by the previous ruling, said Robert Dunham, executive director for the center, which is nonpartisan.

    “It is flatly unconstitutional to say we have given somebody the right to have a unanimous jury determine their sentence — and if they didn’t have it, their death sentence is overturned — and now pull that rug out from under them,” Dunham said. “If the Florida Supreme Court intends to execute individuals whose entitlement to a new sentencing hearing had previously been established by the law then this court has just abandoned the rule of law.”

    In a blistering dissent, Justice Jorge Labarga said the decision by the majority will return Florida to its status as “an absolute outlier." He was the lone dissent. There are currently only five justices on Florida’s Supreme Court, because two of Gov. Ron DeSantis’ three appointments were recently promoted to federal courts.

    “In the strongest possible terms, I dissent,” Labarga wrote. “Death is indeed different. When the government metes out the ultimate sanction, it must do so narrowly and in response to the most aggravated and least mitigated of murders. ... this Court has taken a giant step backward and removed a significant safeguard for the just application of the death penalty in Florida."

    Labarga also noted that Florida “holds the shameful national title as the state with the most death row exonerations” — all the more reason to keep the unanimous jury safeguard in place. Twenty-nine people on death row in Florida have been exonerated since 1973, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

    Responding to Labarga’s dissent, Justice Alan Lawson wrote that this decision does not change Florida’s state law, which requires the unanimous jury.

    “The majority today decides constitutional questions, not political ones,” Lawson wrote. “If the Florida Legislature considers changing (the law) to eliminate the requirement for a unanimous jury recommendation before a sentence of death can be imposed, the fact that this legislative change would make Florida an ‘outlier’ will surely be considered in the ensuing political debate.”

    But whether lawmakers will respond in any way to the ruling remains unclear. House Speaker José Oliva and Senate President Bill Galvano could not be reached for comment Thursday afternoon. DeSantis’ office did not respond to a similar request.

    https://www.tampabay.com/florida-pol...ajor-reversal/

  5. #15
    Administrator Moh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    13,014
    Florida Supreme Court Corrects Major Error in Capital Sentencing Law

    By Kent Scheidegger
    crimeandconsequences.com

    In 2016, in a case on remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the Florida Supreme Court made a major error in the law of jury trial and capital sentencing, running roughshod over decades of precedent. That case was Hurst v. State, 202 So.2d 40 (Fla. 2016), on remand from Hurst v. Florida, 136 S.Ct. 616 (2016). Today, in State v. Poole, No. SC18-245, the state high court backs off from its Hurst opinion to the extent that it goes beyond what the U.S. Supreme Court required.

    The framework for capital sentencing established by the Supreme Court in its 1976 and later decisions requires two additional steps before a convicted murderer can be sentenced to death. First, a fact-based “eligibility” finding must be made that at least one fact has been proved from a statutory list of factors beyond the basic elements of murder. Second, in the “selection” step, there must be a discretionary judgment that this is a case suitable for the death penalty, after considering mitigating as well as aggravating circumstances. The U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions in Hurst and the 2002 case of Ring v. Arizona require a jury trial and proof beyond a reasonable doubt for the eligibility step and only for the eligibility step.

    On remand in the Hurst case, the Florida Supreme Court got this completely wrong. It glossed over the distinction between the eligibility and selection findings and applied the Ring /Hurst requirements to both, along with a requirement that the jury be unanimous. Further, the court applied this requirement retroactively all the way back to Ring. This resulted in massive miscarriages of justice, as even a single dissenting juror in a case that has been correctly tried under the law at the time resulted in setting aside well-deserved sentences.

    In 2001, Anthony Poole broke into the home of Loretta White in the middle of the night while she and her fiance Noah Scott were asleep. He sexually assaulted Ms. White, and attacked her with a tire iron when she resisted. When Mr. Scott came to her defense, Poole beat him to death with the tire iron. Poole’s identity as the perpetrator was confirmed by DNA.

    After a first death sentence was vacated on appeal, a second jury recommended the death penalty 11 to 1. The trial judge weighed the aggravating and mitigating factors and found it was not even close. He resentenced Poole to death.

    After the Florida Supreme Court’s erroneous expansion of U.S. Supreme Court’s requirements in Hurst, the trial court had no choice but to vacate the sentence. The State appealed, asking the Florida Supreme Court to reconsider Hurst. That court did so and today rolled Hurst back to its proper scope of the eligibility finding only. That is, the constitution requires that the finding of at least one aggravating circumstance be made by a jury on proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The procedure and standards for the discretionary selection determination remain up to the legislature.

    The lone dissenting justice writes an opinion with more heat than light, conflating the trend in other other states with what the constitution requires. A concurring justice notes, correctly, that the two have little, if anything, to do with each other.

    Going forward, the Florida Legislature has required that the jury make the selection decision, and today’s decision will not change that. The Legislature unwisely adopted a single-juror-veto system, where a vote of 11 for the death penalty versus 1 for life in prison means that the judgment of the 1 prevails over the judgment of the 11. The Legislature can, and in my opinion should, change to a true unanimity requirement where the jury must be unanimous one way or the other, and a deadlocked jury results in a retrial before another jury.

    A closely related issue is presently before the United States Supreme Court in McKinney v. Arizona.

    https://www.crimeandconsequences.blo...-law/#more-442

  6. #16
    Moderator Ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Newport, United Kingdom
    Posts
    2,454
    Rehearing sought in landmark Polk death penalty case

    Last month the Supreme Court reinstated a death sentence for Lakeland’s Mark Anthony Poole, convicted in 2001 for first-degree murder of Noah Scott and attempted murder/rape of his pregnant fiancé, Loretta White

    TALLAHASSEE - Pointing to “evolving standards of decency,” attorneys for a Death Row inmate have asked the Florida Supreme Court to reconsider a major ruling that said unanimous jury recommendations are not necessary before death sentences can be imposed.

    But Attorney General Ashley Moody’s office Thursday urged the court to reject the request for a rehearing on the issue.

    The filings came after the Supreme Court on Jan. 23 said it “got it wrong” in 2016 when it required changes such as unanimous jury recommendations on death sentences. The 2016 ruling came as judges, lawyers and state leaders tried to move forward after the U.S. Supreme Court had found Florida’s death-penalty system unconstitutional.

    In reversing course last month, the Supreme Court reinstated a death sentence for Mark Anthony Poole, 57, who was convicted in Polk County in the 2001 first-degree murder of Lakeland’s Noah Scott, the attempted murder and rape of his pregnant fiancé, Loretta White, armed burglary and armed robbery.

    A jury in 2011 recommended by a vote of 11-1 that Poole should be sentenced to death — a sentence that a judge imposed. But based on the Florida Supreme Court’s 2016 decision, Poole’s death sentence was later vacated because of the lack of a unanimous jury recommendation.

    In the Feb. 7 motion for a rehearing at the Supreme Court, Poole’s attorneys raised a series of issues, including that justices did not properly take into account “evolving standards of decency” when they reversed course on the need for unanimous jury recommendations on death sentences.

    “Current standards of decency show that jury unanimity is required to impose a sentence of death. This Florida Supreme Court adopted that conclusion more than three years ago. Since then, the notion that unanimity can be dispensed with when the prospect of death looms has only become more unpalatable: Today, only ‘Alabama ... still permits a judge to impose the death penalty based upon a jury’s non-unanimous recommendation for death’,” the motion said, partially quoting a report by the Death Penalty Information Center.

    But in a response filed Thursday, Moody’s office disputed that unanimous jury recommendations are required under the U.S. Constitution’s Eighth Amendment, which bars cruel and unusual punishment.

    “The United States Supreme Court has never held that the Eighth Amendment requires the jury’s final recommendation in a capital case to be unanimous,” the attorney general’s response said. “Florida was not required to adopt a unanimous jury recommendation requirement simply because a majority of other states have done so.”

    The decision last month by the Florida Supreme Court came after a long, complicated series of issues that stemmed from a January 2016 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in a case dubbed Hurst v. Florida. That ruling found the state’s death-penalty system was unconstitutional because it gave too much authority to judges, instead of juries, in imposing death sentences.

    The Florida Supreme Court in October 2016, in the similarly named case of Hurst v. State, interpreted and applied the U.S. Supreme Court ruling. In addition to requiring unanimous jury recommendations, it also dealt with a critical issue of jurors finding what are known as “aggravating factors” that can justify death sentences.

    In 2017, the Legislature passed a law that required unanimous jury recommendations as it complied with the state Supreme Court ruling. That law remains in place, and the Legislature has not moved to change it during the current legislative session.

    https://www.theledger.com/news/20200...h-penalty-case
    "How do you get drunk on death row?" - Werner Herzog

    "When we get fruit, we get the juice and water. I ferment for a week! It tastes like chalk, it's nasty" - Blaine Keith Milam #999558 Texas Death Row

  7. #17
    Senior Member CnCP Legend Neil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    1,248
    You guys think his death sentence will stand?

  8. #18
    Moderator Ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Newport, United Kingdom
    Posts
    2,454
    Poole's death sentence was reinstated by the Florida Supreme Court and yes i firmly believe that Poole will be executed sometime in the future.
    "How do you get drunk on death row?" - Werner Herzog

    "When we get fruit, we get the juice and water. I ferment for a week! It tastes like chalk, it's nasty" - Blaine Keith Milam #999558 Texas Death Row

  9. #19
    Senior Member CnCP Legend Neil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    1,248
    I really wish Delaware, Connecticut, and Washington state had conservative justices. Delaware especially, they were a good death penalty state. All the liberal justices threw out the death penalty there due to the Hurst ruling. If they had a conservative governor they could feasibly reinstate the death sentences of the 16 people who were resentenced to life.

  10. #20
    Senior Member CnCP Legend Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    4,795
    If they had politicians with a back bone. The conservatives don't do damn thing. We watched the "Conservatives" in Florida change the jury requirements to 12-0 without challenging the FSC over their stupid interpretation of Hurst. The justices in Delaware were looking for an excuse to throw it out, Hurst didn't even address the vote for sentencing.
    "There is a point in the history of a society when it becomes so pathologically soft and tender that among other things it sides even with those who harm it, criminals, and does this quite seriously and honestly. Punishing somehow seems unfair to it, and it is certain that imagining ‘punishment’ and ‘being supposed to punish’ hurts it, arouses fear in it." Friedrich Nietzsche

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

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
  •