TBO.com - TBO is Tampa Bay Online

State High Court Again Weighs Death Sentence

ADVERTISEMENT

By TODD LESKANIC The Tampa Tribune

The Tampa Tribune

Published: June 14, 2008

Anyone interested in learning why death penalty cases take years to resolve should take a look at the prosecution of Faunce Levon Pearce.

Six years ago, Pearce was sentenced to death for the 1999 killing of 17-year-old Robert Crawford and the attempted murder of Stephen Tuttle, then 16. Four years ago, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and sentence.

Pearce then sought relief at the trial level, asking Circuit Judge Lynn Tepper to overturn his conviction and sentence. Tepper did so in December 2006, ruling that Pearce received poor legal representation at trial.

On Friday - nearly nine years after the initial crime - Pearce's case returned to the state's highest court.

This time, lawyers for the state asked the justices to overturn Tepper's ruling and to reinstate the original verdict and death sentence. Pearce's attorney, Richard Kiley, argued against such a move, telling the justices that Tepper's decision to grant his client a new trial was the correct one.

The court doesn't rule during oral arguments, and there is no timetable for a decision.

Tepper cited two separate oversights by trial attorneys A.J. Ivie and Mark Ware in overturning Pearce's conviction and sentence.

First, she ruled that they should have attempted to exclude evidence that Pearce forced Tuttle to perform a sex act on him before the shootings. Pearce wasn't charged with a sex crime, and Tepper ruled that allowing the jury to hear evidence of it was prejudicial to Pearce. Excluding that evidence from the trial could have changed the outcome, she ruled.

On Friday, Assistant Attorney General Scott Browne told the justices that the trial's outcome wouldn't have changed even if the jury hadn't heard the evidence. Browne said the state presented such overwhelming evidence that Pearce ordered the shootings, excluding the sex act wouldn't have mattered.

"You have five witnesses explaining Pearce's role and no contrary testimony," Browne said. "How do you make the leap to reasonable probability of a different outcome based on this record?"

Secondly, Tepper ruled that Ware and Ivie failed Pearce by neglecting to prepare mitigating evidence for the penalty phase. Pearce might have avoided the death sentence had the jury heard about his strict upbringing and mental health problems, she ruled.

Browne argued Friday that Ware and Ivie didn't present mitigation because Pearce told them not to contact his family or look into his background.

Kiley countered by arguing Pearce misunderstood what his attorneys were asking.

Prosecutors said Pearce was angry at Tuttle and Crawford for losing $1,200 of his money in a drug deal, so he and three other men drove the pair down State Road 54 in Land O' Lakes, stopped, and shot them. Tuttle survived by plugging the hole in his head and flagging down help.

Reporter Todd Leskanic can be reached at (727) 815-1084.

Share this:

Loading Comments...

Email Print

ADVERTISEMENT