ELWOOD CLARK BARCLAY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Elwood Barclay appeals the reimposition of his death sentence for first-degree murder following remand to allow him to rebut or explain matters in a presentence investigation report. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the death sentence, finding that Barclay failed to present sufficient evidence to mitigate any circumstances and that all constitutional requirements, including Gardner v. Florida, were satisfied.
The death sentence is affirmed. The trial judge properly considered all matters presented by Barclay and found nothing mitigating any circumstance. No defect in the sentencing order stemming from improper material in the PSI has been identified, and Gardner v. Florida requirements were satisfied.
[1] A court cannot abrogate the "law of the case" doctrine when reconsidering a matter previously affirmed on appeal.
[2] A defendant must present evidence to rebut or explain matters in a presentence investigation report to successfully challenge its contents.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The dictates of Gardner v. Florida, 430 U.S. 349, 97 S.Ct. 1197, 51 L.Ed.2d 393 (1977), have been met, and no defect in the original sentencing order has been identified as stemming from improper material in the PSI.”
Establishes that the Gardner v. Florida constitutional requirements were satisfied and no improper PSI material affected the sentence.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBarclay was convicted of first-degree murder. His conviction and original sentence had been previously affirmed by the Florida Supreme Court, and revi…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Presentence Investigation Report cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This case returns to us following our remand to the trial court in order to provide Barclay an opportunity to rebut or explain matters appearing in a presentence investigation report (PSI). Barclay v. State, 362 So. 2d 657 (Fla.1978). Before that remand, Barclay’s conviction and sentence for first degree murder had been affirmed by this Court,1 and review of that action had been denied by the United States Supreme Court.2
On remand Barclay was afforded several evidentiary hearings and argument of counsel. Only one witness was called on Barclay’s behalf at the first hearing, principally to portray Barclay’s lesser role in the events surrounding the murder, and to comment on a second murder with which he was not involved. At a second hearing, Barclay’s counsel argued extensively against the reimposition of the death penalty, but offered virtually no evidence in derogation of the information contained in the PSI. The trial judge concluded during a later sentencing proceeding that he had “carefully considered all of those matters presented by the defendant in response to the presen-tence investigation report, and [found] nothing is such responses which mitigates any circumstance herein.” Our independent review of the record in this case completely supports this conclusion.
Barclay now challenges the reimposition of a death sentence, primarily by argument against the findings previously reviewed here and affirmed. We cannot accept counsel’s suggestion that we abrogate the “law of the case”. See Dougan v. State 398 So. 2d 439 (Fla. 1981). The dictates of Gardner v. Florida, 430 U.S. 349, 97 S.Ct. 1197, 51 L.Ed.2d 393 (1977), have been met, and no' defect in the original sentencing order has been identified as stemming from improper material in the PSI. There being no reason to reconsider the matters previously analyzed, we again affirm the trial judge’s sentence of death.
It is so ordered.
ADKINS, Acting C. J., and BOYD, ENGLAND and ALDERMAN, JJ., concur. OVERTON and McDONALD, JJ., dissent.
. Barclay v. State, 343 So. 2d 1266 (Fla.1977).
. Barclay v. Florida, 439 U.S. 892, 99 S.Ct. 249, 58 L.Ed.2d 237 (1978).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Elwood C. Barclay v. Louie L, 444 So. 2d 956 (Fla. 1984)…nded for resentencing because of Gardner v. Florida, 430 U.S. 349, 97 S.Ct. 1197, 51 L.Ed.2d 393 (1977). Barclay v. State, 362 So. 2d 657 (Fla.1978). [*958] On remand the trial court resentenced Barclay to death, which we affirmed. Barclay v. State, 411 So. 2d 1310 (Fla.1981), affirmed, — U.S. -, 103 S.Ct. 3418, 77 L.Ed.2d 1134 (1983). Following the United States Supreme Court’s affirmance, Barclay then filed the instant petition in October 1983. Prior to our receiving the state’s response, however, the govern…
-
Elwood C. Barclay v. State, 470 So. 2d 691 (Fla. 1985)…r v. Florida, 430 U.S. 349, 97 S.Ct. 1197, 51 L.Ed.2d 393 (1977). Barclay v. State, 362 So. 2d 657 (Fla.1978). After the Gardner hearing, the trial court again sentenced Barclay to death. This Court again upheld the death sentence, Barclay v. State, 411 So. 2d 1310 (Fla.1981), which the United States Supreme Court affirmed. Barclay v. Florida, 463 U.S. 939, 103 S.Ct. 3418, 77 L.Ed.2d 1134 (1983). Following the Supreme Court’s affirmance, Barclay filed a petition for habeas corpus with this Court. Shortly ther…
-
Barclay v. Florida, 463 U.S. 939 (U.S. 1983)…affirmed the death sentence on the basis of [*946] findings that are essentially identical to its original findings. App. 82-141. On appeal, the Florida Supreme Court again affirmed, holding that Barclay had not been denied any rights under Gardner. 411 So. 2d 1310 (1981). Rehearing was denied by an equally divided court. Ibid. I Barclay has raised numerous objections to the trial judge’s findings. The Florida courts declined to reconsider these arguments in the resentencing proceedings. The resentenc-ing he…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gardner v. Florida, 430 U.S. 349 (U.S. 1977)
- Elwood Clark Barclay and Jacob John Dougan, Jr. v. State, 343 So. 2d 1266 (Fla. 1977)
- Ramsey v. New York, 439 U.S. 892 (U.S. 1978)
- Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers v. Foust, 439 U.S. 892 (U.S. 1978)
- Elwood Clark Barclay and Jacob John Dougan, Jr. v. State, 362 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 1978)
- Dougan v. State, 398 So. 2d 439 (Fla. 1981)