Jeremiah M. Rodgers v. State of Florida ( 2018 )


Menu:
  •           Supreme Court of Florida
    ____________
    No. SC17-1050
    ____________
    JEREMIAH M. RODGERS,
    Appellant,
    vs.
    STATE OF FLORIDA,
    Appellee.
    [February 8, 2018]
    PER CURIAM.
    Jeremiah M. Rodgers, a prisoner under sentence of death who waived a
    penalty phase jury, appeals the circuit court’s summary denial of a postconviction
    motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851 seeking
    sentencing relief pursuant to Hurst v. Florida, 
    136 S. Ct. 616
    (2016), and Hurst v.
    State, 
    202 So. 3d 40
    (Fla. 2016), cert. denied, 
    137 S. Ct. 2161
    (2017). We have
    jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.1
    1. We review the summary denial of a postconviction motion de novo.
    Barnes v. State, 
    124 So. 3d 904
    , 911 (Fla. 2013).
    We have consistently held that the Hurst decisions do not apply to
    defendants, like Rodgers, who waive a penalty phase jury. See, e.g., Mullens v.
    State, 
    197 So. 3d 16
    , 40 (Fla. 2016) (affirming the death sentence of a defendant
    who waived a penalty phase jury and explaining that a defendant “cannot subvert
    the right to jury factfinding by waiving that right and then suggesting that a
    subsequent development in the law has fundamentally undermined his sentence”),
    cert. denied, 
    137 S. Ct. 672
    (2017); Brant v. State, 
    197 So. 3d 1051
    , 1079 (Fla.
    2016) (concluding that the Mullens Court’s holding in the context of a direct
    appeal “necessarily preclude[s]” a defendant who waived a penalty phase jury from
    raising a Hurst claim on postconviction).
    Rodgers, however, seeks to avoid this result by attacking the waiver itself,
    arguing that an evidentiary hearing is required to determine if a recently diagnosed
    condition of gender dysphoria, which Rodgers contends existed at the time of the
    waiver, but went undiagnosed by prior evaluators, rendered Rodgers incompetent.
    We agree with the circuit court that the time for Rodgers to contest the prior
    competency determination has passed. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.851(d)(1). This
    Court has long since affirmed Rodgers’ waiver of a penalty phase jury, see
    Rodgers v. State, 
    3 So. 3d 1127
    , 1131-33 (Fla. 2009), and Rodgers has not
    proffered any newly discovered evidence that would warrant revisiting the validity
    of this waiver. Cf. Raleigh v. State, 
    932 So. 2d 1054
    , 1060 (Fla. 2006)
    -2-
    (recognizing a “narrow exception to th[e] general procedural bar” of allowing an
    Ake v. Oklahoma, 
    470 U.S. 68
    (1985)-type claim of inadequate mental health
    assistance that should have been raised on direct appeal to instead be raised on
    postconviction for only those cases involving “psychiatric examinations so grossly
    insufficient that they ignore clear indications of either mental retardation or organic
    brain damage”) (quoting State v. Sireci, 
    502 So. 2d 1221
    , 1224 (Fla. 1987)).
    Accordingly, we affirm the circuit court’s summary denial.
    It is so ordered.
    LABARGA, C.J., and LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, POLSTON, and LAWSON,
    JJ., concur.
    PARIENTE, J., concurs in result with an opinion.
    NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND,
    IF FILED, DETERMINED.
    PARIENTE, J., concurring in result.
    The issue in this case is whether Rodgers’ waivers of the right to a penalty
    phase jury and the right to postconviction proceedings and counsel should be
    rendered invalid because Rodgers was suffering from undiagnosed and untreated
    gender dysphoria2 when he made the waivers. See Rodgers v. State (Rodgers III),
    2. The American Psychiatric Association defines “gender dysphoria” as “a
    conflict between a person’s physical or assigned gender and the gender with which
    he/she/they identify.” What is Gender Dysphoria?, Am. Psychiatric Ass’n,
    https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/gender-dysphoria/what-is-gender-
    dysphoria (last visited Nov. 8, 2017).
    -3-
    No. SC11-1401, 
    104 So. 3d 1087
    , 
    2012 WL 5381782
    , *1-2 (Fla. Oct. 17, 2012)
    (unpublished); Rodgers v. State (Rodgers II), 
    3 So. 3d 1127
    , 1130 (Fla. 2009).
    Because both the trial court and this Court were aware of Rodgers’ long history of
    mental illness in determining Rodgers’ competency to make the waivers and in
    reviewing Rodgers’ waivers, respectively, I agree that Rodgers’ waivers remain
    valid and, therefore, he is not entitled to Hurst3 relief. See Silvia v. State, No.
    SC17-337 (Fla. Feb. 1, 2018); Mullens v. State, 
    197 So. 3d 16
    , 38-40 (Fla. 2016). I
    write separately to emphasize the troubling history of Rodgers’ mental illness.
    Direct Appeal in 2006
    Rodgers pleaded guilty as a principal to the first-degree murder at issue in
    this case. Rodgers v. State (Rodgers I), 
    934 So. 2d 1207
    , 1210 (Fla. 2006).
    Rodgers then attempted to withdraw his plea and later waived his right to a guilt
    phase jury trial, again entering a plea. 
    Id. at 1214.
    After pleading guilty, Rodgers
    was sentenced to death following the jury’s 9-3 recommendation for death. 
    Id. at 1213.
    On direct appeal, this Court affirmed the trial court’s decision prohibiting
    Rodgers from withdrawing his plea, finding that “Rodgers understood at the time
    of his plea that his attorneys disagreed on whether he should enter the plea.” 
    Id. at 3.
    Hurst v. State (Hurst), 
    202 So. 3d 40
    (Fla. 2016), cert. denied, 
    137 S. Ct. 2161
    (2017); see Hurst v. Florida, 
    136 S. Ct. 616
    (2016).
    -4-
    1216. As to Rodgers’ sentence of death, this Court reversed and remanded for a
    new penalty phase after determining that the trial court erred in excluding evidence
    related to two potential mitigating circumstances regarding domination by the
    codefendant. 
    Id. at 1219-20.
    As to the mitigation, including Rodgers’ difficult
    childhood and his long history of suicide attempts, this Court explained:
    Angela Mason, a social worker, reviewed a variety of records from
    schools, institutions, hospitals, and law enforcement agencies. The
    records contained reports that Rodgers was given his first beer at two
    years of age and that he reported sexual abuse by his mother
    numerous times, starting at age three. At fourteen, Rodgers reported
    that his mother had full sexual intercourse with him on multiple
    occasions, first getting him high on marijuana that was laced with
    formaldehyde. Although Child Protection Services was called about
    the abuse, Mason was unable to find any investigative report.
    Another report stated that Rodgers’ father threatened to shoot him and
    put an unloaded gun to Rodgers’ head. At school, Rodgers was
    placed in a class for severely emotionally disturbed children. Rodgers
    attempted suicide five times by the age of thirteen, including slitting
    his wrists in a bathtub which left physical evidence.
    David Foy, a professor of psychology at Pepperdine University,
    reviewed Rodgers’ medical records and testified that six out of the six
    classic risk factors for mental illness existed in Rodgers’ childhood
    home life. Rodgers was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder.
    Dr. Sarah Deland, a psychiatrist, testified as an expert regarding
    Rodgers’ mental health. Dr. Deland stated that Rodgers’ diagnoses
    were post-traumatic stress disorder, disassociative disorder, substance
    abuse in remission, and borderline personality disorder. She testified
    in depth about these particular diagnoses and how Rodgers’ life events
    shaped his development.
    
    Id. at 1213.
    The Court concluded: “Given the extensive mitigation which
    was presented in the case, including Rodgers’ significant mental health history, we
    cannot say that the State has shown that there is no reasonable possibility that the
    -5-
    error in excluding this evidence did not contribute to the sentence of death.” 
    Id. at 1219-20
    (emphasis added).
    Direct Appeal from Resentencing in 2009
    On remand for resentencing, Rodgers waived his right to a penalty phase
    jury. Rodgers 
    II, 3 So. 3d at 1130
    . Rodgers also waived his right and did not
    allow his attorneys to present evidence of mitigation other than his own testimony.
    
    Id. The trial
    court again imposed a sentence of death. 
    Id. at 1128.
    On appeal, this Court determined that Rodgers “clearly showed the capacity
    to appreciate the proceedings and the nature of possible penalties; he showed that
    he understood the adversarial nature of the legal process; he manifested appropriate
    courtroom behavior; and he was able to testify in a relevant manner.” 
    Id. at 1132-
    33. Accordingly, this Court affirmed Rodgers’ sentence of death. 
    Id. at 1135.
    Postconviction
    After this Court affirmed his sentence of death following resentencing,
    Rodgers waived the right to postconviction proceedings and counsel. Rodgers III,
    
    2012 WL 5381782
    , at *1. Following a Durocher4 hearing, the trial court “found
    Rodgers competent and issued an order discharging counsel and dismissing the
    proceedings.” Rodgers III, 
    2012 WL 5381782
    , at *1.
    4. Durocher v. Singletary, 
    623 So. 2d 482
    (Fla. 1993).
    -6-
    Rodgers’ discharged counsel appealed to this Court, challenging the trial
    court’s competency finding. 
    Id. at *1-2.
    Reviewing the record, which contained
    evidence of severe mental illness, this Court denied counsel’s claim, stating that
    Rodgers had previously been found “competent to: (1) plead guilty to the crime for
    which [Rodgers] was convicted and sentenced to death, and (2) waive [the] right to
    a penalty phase jury during [the] second penalty phase, and this Court affirmed on
    direct appeal.” 
    Id. Also, the
    Court noted that “two mental health experts examined
    Rodgers in preparation for the Durocher hearing, and both determined that
    Rodgers was competent.” 
    Id. at 2.
    This Case
    Rodgers now asserts that, for most of his life, he has suffered from
    undiagnosed and untreated gender dysphoria, which undermines the trial court’s
    and this Court’s former findings of competency in determining that his waivers
    were valid. However, Rodgers does not raise his condition of gender dysphoria as
    a claim of newly discovered evidence or ineffective assistance of counsel. See per
    curiam op. at 2.
    From the age of 14, Rodgers spent most of his life incarcerated with mental
    illness. In fact, Rodgers and his codefendant, Lawrence, who Rodgers testified
    “appealed to [his] angry side,” Rodgers 
    II, 3 So. 3d at 1130
    , met in a mental
    hospital in Chattahoochee, Florida. Rodgers 
    I, 934 So. 2d at 1209
    .
    -7-
    While in State custody, at the age of 14 and again at the age of 18, Rodgers
    attempted self-castration. Amici Curiae Br. of Am. Civil Liberties Union
    Foundation & Am. Civil Liberties Union of Fla. (ACLU Br.) at 5. Shortly before
    waiving the right to postconviction proceedings and counsel, Rodgers wrote letters
    to defense counsel stating that Rodgers’ gender identity disorder was the driving
    force behind Rodgers’ desire to die, stating that “gender dysphoria and the trauma
    and excruciating pain of [Rodgers’] life ha[d] caused [Rodgers] to lose [the] will to
    live and to choose death over life.” 
    Id. at 8.
    In other words, Rodgers waived both
    the right to a penalty phase jury and the right to postconviction while struggling
    with the effects of his untreated gender dysphoria. 
    Id. at 6-7.
    According to the record, untreated gender dysphoria can cause severe harm
    and lead to suicidality and debilitating depression. ACLU Br. at 4; see Appellant’s
    Initial Br. at 10. In fact, when Rodgers pleaded guilty, Dr. Fredderic J. Sautter,
    Ph.D. (a psychologist), opined in his report that Rodgers’ plea may have been
    influenced by his mental illness and “wish to die.” Appellant’s Second Resp. to
    State’s Mot. Suppl. R. & Withdrawal Req. for Protective Order at 12, Rodgers v.
    State, No. SC01-185 (Fla. July 12, 2004). Likewise, the ACLU suggests that
    Rodgers may have waived the penalty phase in an effort to commit suicide by
    execution to escape the pain of the untreated condition. ACLU Br. at 2.
    -8-
    Therefore, Rodgers’ reported suicidality, self-mutilations, and severe depression
    are consistent with the severe symptoms of untreated gender dysphoria.
    CONCLUSION
    While it appears that untreated gender dysphoria has been a factor in
    Rodgers’ mental health issues, this Court has already considered and affirmed
    Rodgers’ waivers of a penalty phase jury, as well as postconviction proceedings
    and counsel, with a record indicating severe mental illness. Thus, the recent
    specific diagnosis of gender dysphoria, not raised as a newly discovered evidence
    claim, does not invalidate Rodgers’ waivers. Therefore, I agree with the majority
    that Rodgers is not entitled to have his waivers set aside.
    An Appeal from the Circuit Court in and for Santa Rosa County,
    John F. Simon, Jr., Judge - Case No. 571998CF000274XXAXMX
    Billy H. Nolas, Chief, Capital Habeas Unit, Office of the Federal Public Defender,
    Northern District of Florida, Tallahassee, Florida,
    for Appellant
    Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Charmaine M. Millsaps, Senior Assistant
    Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida,
    for Appellee
    Nancy G. Abudu, Daniel B. Tilley, and Jacqueline Nicole Azis of ACLU
    Foundation of Florida, Inc., Miami, Florida,
    Amicus Curiae American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Florida, Inc.
    -9-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: SC17-1050

Judges: Per Curiam

Filed Date: 2/8/2018

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024