2020-11

James Terry Colley, Jr. v. State of Florida ( 2020 )

Menu:

Supreme Court of Florida
____________
No. SC18-2014
____________
JAMES TERRY COLLEY, JR.,
Appellant,
vs.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
November 25, 2020
PER CURIAM.
James Terry Colley, Jr. appeals two first-degree murder convictions and two
corresponding sentences of death. 1 We affirm the convictions and sentences.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
I. Guilt Phase
The jury in this case found Colley guilty of murdering his estranged wife,
Amanda Cloaninger Colley, and Amanda’s friend Lindy Dobbins. At the time of
the murders, Colley was subject to a domestic violence injunction restricting his
contact with Amanda. In fact, less than two hours before committing the murders,
1. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.
Colley personally appeared at a court hearing about an earlier violation of that
injunction. We recount the hours leading up to the murders in some detail, because
the sequence of events is relevant to the arguments Colley raises on appeal.
At the time of the murders, Colley was living in his sister’s house on
Garrison Drive in St. Augustine. Amanda still lived in the marital home on South
Bellagio Drive, about fifteen miles away. Although he was dating someone else,
Colley hoped he would reconcile with Amanda. Colley suspected that Amanda
was dating, but she had refused to admit that to him.
Around 4 a.m. on August 27, 2015, Colley drove to Amanda’s house,
unaware that Amanda was not there. Colley searched the empty home and found
sex toys and men’s polo shirts. His suspicions confirmed, Colley ransacked the
house, smashing television sets and dumping trash on the floor. Afterward, Colley
briefly visited a friend a few houses down the street (to tell the friend what he had
discovered), and he eventually returned to his sister’s home on Garrison Drive.
Colley also placed multiple phone calls to Amanda, most of which went
unanswered.
Amanda returned to her home at about 9 a.m. She FaceTimed her boyfriend,
Lamar Douberly, to show him what Colley had done. Lamar drove to Amanda’s
and called the police nonemergency line to make a report. A public service
assistance officer arrived at 9:55 a.m. and observed the damage. Amanda told the
-2-
officer she did not want to file any formal charges against Colley until she spoke
with her mother and attorney, so the officer left. Two of Amanda’s friends, Lindy
Dobbins (the other murder victim) and Rachel Hendricks, arrived minutes later.
Meanwhile, at about the same time that Amanda was returning to her home,
Colley arrived at the courthouse for a hearing on an unrelated violation of his
domestic violence injunction. In video footage of the hearing, Colley appeared
calm and cooperative. After a colloquy in which Colley, among other things,
denied being under the influence of any intoxicants, the trial judge allowed Colley
to plead no contest to the charged violation.
Colley left the courthouse a little before 9:30 a.m. and once again began
calling Amanda. After several calls and voicemails, Amanda finally answered at
9:41 a.m. She and Colley spoke for roughly fourteen minutes.
Having departed the courthouse, Colley drove to a gas station near his
sister’s house, went to his sister’s home, and then briefly returned to the same gas
station, where he bought a small amount of gas and some items from the store.
The evidence at trial supported an inference that Colley retrieved ammunition
during his brief stop at his sister’s house. The parties disputed whether he also
retrieved guns there, or whether he already had guns in the car he was driving.
Regardless, shortly after 10 a.m., Colley started the twenty-minute drive back to
Amanda’s home.
-3-
On his way to Amanda’s, Colley had a phone conversation with his father.
A dog walker who was near Colley’s father at the time overheard the call. She
testified that she heard Colley’s father pleading, “Please, please son, come back
and get your truck. Everybody knows what you’ve been through.” To which the
person on the other end of the call responded, “I just can’t f***ing take this
anymore.”
Instead of going directly to Amanda’s home, Colley drove to an adjacent
street and parked his car at an unoccupied house. From there, he crossed a berm
and walked along a trail that ran parallel to Amanda’s fenced-in backyard. He was
armed with two handguns, a 9mm and a .45 caliber.
Colley approached the back of Amanda’s house and began shooting from the
outside. Amanda, Lamar, Lindy, and Rachel were inside. Hearing the sound of
gunshots and the shattering back-door glass, Lamar shouted for everyone to run.
Lamar himself ran out of the house through the garage. Fatefully, the women all
ran to the home’s master bedroom area. Amanda hid in the bathroom. Lindy and
Rachel barricaded themselves in the closet. At 10:36 a.m., Amanda and Lindy
separately called 911 from their cellphones.
Shouting “where is he, where is he,” Colley entered the home through the
shattered back glass doors. Colley first found Amanda. He screamed at her and
demanded to know where “he” was. Amanda said she did not know and begged
-4-
Colley to put down his gun. Colley then tried to open the door to the closet, but
Rachel held the door shut with her foot. A crying Amanda told Colley that only
Rachel and Lindy were in the closet, which prompted Lindy to say, “It’s Lindy in
here. It’s Lindy!”
Colley returned to the bathroom and shot Amanda—but not fatally. He then
went back to the closet. Again unable to open the closet door, this time Colley
fired a shot through the door. The bullet grazed Rachel’s arm, causing her to let go
of the door. As Rachel ran out of the closet, Colley entered it and walked to where
Lindy was crouched down, hiding behind a chest. Colley shot and killed her.
Amanda was still in the bathroom. So Colley went back there and shot her
three more times, until his 9mm was out of bullets. Colley dropped the 9mm and
shot Amanda five more times, using the .45.
Colley then left the home, returned to his sister’s house on Garrison Drive,
abandoned his cell phone, and fled the area. Police officers arrested Colley hours
later after a traffic stop in Norton, Virginia.
Colley was charged with the first-degree murder of Amanda Colley; the
first-degree murder of Lindy Dobbins; the attempted first-degree murder of Lamar
Douberly; the attempted first-degree murder of Rachel Hendricks; burglary with an
assault or battery; burglary of a dwelling; and aggravated stalking after an
injunction.
-5-
At trial the State proved its case principally through Rachel Hendricks’ and
Lamar Douberly’s testimony and through cell phone and video records that
documented Colley’s actions in the hours leading up to the murders. Dr. Predrag
Bulic, the St. Johns County chief medical examiner, testified about the autopsies
performed on the murder victims. Amanda sustained nine gunshot wounds: two in
the chest area, two in the abdomen, three in the right leg, one in the right hand, and
one in the left hand. Amanda’s wounds showed that the shots had traveled
different trajectories. Some had followed a slight downward trajectory, consistent
with both the shooter and the victim standing up at the time of the gunshots. Other
bullets traveled through Amanda’s body at an upward trajectory, indicating that
she was lying horizontal on the ground when shot.
Dr. Bulic inferred that Amanda suffered multiple gun shots in advance of
sustaining one shot that would have paralyzed her from the neck down and another
that would have been instantaneously lethal. Specifically, Amanda’s arms and legs
showed several defensive wounds that could only have been inflicted while
Amanda was still capable of movement. When asked whether Amanda was
conscious of what was happening, Dr. Bulic testified, “She was aware. She had
a—a knowledge of what’s happening and—through the entire shooting process.”
As to Lindy, Dr. Bulic testified that she sustained three gunshot wounds: one
on the right temple, one on the right shoulder, and one on the left foot. The
-6-
trajectory of the shoulder and temple gunshots had followed a steep downward
angle, consistent with the shooter being above the victim. Both of these gunshots
were immediately lethal.
In its closing, the defense argued that the State had not proven premeditation
and that therefore the jury should not find Colley guilty of first-degree murder and
attempted murder. The defense’s theory was that Colley had been on “an
emotional rollercoaster” because of the uncertain status of his relationship with
Amanda and that the killings were a “snap reaction.” Defense counsel argued that
Colley did not go to Amanda’s home with the intention of killing anyone. Defense
counsel speculated that something set Colley off—counsel did not know what—
only after Colley arrived at Amanda’s home.
On July 18, 2018, the jury unanimously found Colley guilty of first-degree
premeditated and first-degree felony murder of Amanda Colley; first-degree
premeditated and first-degree felony murder of Lindy Dobbins; attempted first-
degree murder of Lamar Douberly; attempted felony murder of Rachel Hendricks;
burglary of a dwelling with an assault or battery; burglary of a dwelling; and
aggravated stalking after an injunction.
II. Penalty Phase
On July 23, 2018, the same jury returned for the penalty phase on Colley’s
murder convictions. The State presented four victim impact statements (two for
-7-
each victim) but did not otherwise supplement the guilt phase evidence. The
defense focused on Colley’s state of mind and claimed that he had been impaired
as a result of taking Ambien early in the morning of the murders.
Defense Penalty Phase Case
Colley presented the testimony of three expert and eight lay witnesses. The
experts focused on Colley’s alleged impairment. The lay witnesses testified about
Colley’s character and reputation in the community.
Through Colley’s mitigation experts, the jury heard Colley’s version of what
happened the morning of the murders. Colley told the experts that he had
consumed alcohol and cocaine the night before he ransacked Amanda’s house.
Colley said that he had spoken with Amanda in the predawn hours and offered to
pay for the damage he had done, and that Amanda had agreed not to call the police
to report the incident. Colley also said that he took one or two Ambien tablets
around 5 a.m. and that his father later woke him up to attend the 9:00 a.m. court
hearing.
Consistent with the State’s evidence, Colley told his experts that he had
spoken with Amanda after the court hearing and visited a gas station and his
sister’s house before driving to Amanda’s. But Colley claimed that he had initially
approached the back of the house unarmed, only to have a panic attack when he
-8-
saw a man through the window. That prompted Colley to walk back to his car,
retrieve his guns, and ultimately carry out the killings.
Dr. Mark Mills, a forensic psychiatrist, opined that Colley was substantially
impaired during the murders because he was experiencing an Ambien side effect
called parasomnia. Dr. Mills described parasomnia as a sleep disorder where
someone seems to be acting in a rational way, but later has no recollection of his or
her actions. Dr. Mills based his opinion largely on the fact that, when he
interviewed Colley in October 2017 (approximately two years after the murders),
Colley reported having stroboscopic memory—remembering only flashes of what
happened the day of the murders.
Dr. Michele Quiroga, a clinical and forensic neuropsychologist, testified that
Colley suffers from depression, anxiety, and panic attacks, and that Colley was
taking antidepressants in August 2015 (the month of the murders) and self-
medicating with alcohol. Dr. Quiroga did not give an opinion as to impairment.
Last, Dr. Daniel Buffington, a clinical pharmacologist, gave testimony
similar to Dr. Mills’s. Dr. Buffington described parasomnia and opined that
Colley’s snapshot memory from the Ambien and other prescriptions (Colley was
taking antidepressants and sleep disorder and pain medications) showed that
Colley was substantially impaired at the time of the murders.
-9-
As for the lay witnesses, Colley’s two sisters testified that he grew up in a
normal home with a very close-knit family. They described Colley as having a
strong work ethic from a young age and being gainfully employed his entire life.
They said that Colley was a great hands-on father to his two kids. They described
Colley’s volunteer work and mentorships. They explained that Colley had
struggled with alcohol abuse for several years. One of the sisters mentioned that as
a child Colley had witnessed two incidents of domestic violence between his
parents. Two cousins and a brother-in-law attested to Colley being a good father
and uncle. A neighbor explained that Colley was involved in the community by
coaching his son’s football and baseball teams. One of Colley’s friends testified
that Colley had always been good to his family. And two former coworkers
described Colley as a good friend and very family-oriented.
State’s Rebuttal
To refute the claim that Colley was impaired at the time of the murders, the
State presented the testimony of two witnesses: Jeffrey Danzinger, a forensic
psychiatrist, and Judge Charles Tinlin, who presided over Colley’s injunction
violation hearing the morning of the murders.
Dr. Danzinger described parasomnia as an abnormal event or experience
during sleep. He explained that any side effects from Ambien are rare and
uncommon. He said that people in a parasomnia state sometimes are able to
- 10 -
engage in behaviors like sleepwalking or driving a car, but generally these
behaviors are poorly coordinated. And, to a layperson, those in such a state would
appear confused, dazed, and obviously impaired.
Dr. Danzinger explained the basis for his opinion that Colley was neither
impaired by substances nor suffering from any parasomnia or sleep disorder at the
time of the murders. First, he noted that Colley’s behavior was completely normal
from the time his medications were prescribed until the day of the murders.
Second, he believed Colley’s behavior at the courthouse an hour before the
murders was completely inconsistent with someone in a parasomnia state; Colley
was able to coherently, logically, and appropriately engage in a plea colloquy with
Judge Tinlin. Dr. Danziger noted that at the hearing Colley asked the court several
questions unique to his case which, to Dr. Danzinger, indicated Colley was
clearheaded and thinking logically. Finally, Dr. Danziger relied on the fact that, in
an interview with a psychologist in November 2015 (approximately ninety-days
after the murders), Colley described the murders but did not report any memory
loss.
Judge Tinlin testified that he had no concerns that Colley was impaired
during the injunction violation hearing and that he would not have accepted a plea
if Colley had exhibited any signs of intoxication. The judge recalled that Colley’s
- 11 -
demeanor was fine. Colley asked questions, gave appropriate responses, and
seemed alert and intelligent.
During Judge Tinlin’s testimony, the State introduced the video recording of
the hearing. The video showed Colley answering various questions in order to
enter a plea of no contest. Colley testified (under oath) about his job and education
level, and he answered “no” when asked if he was under the influence of any
intoxicants. Colley also voluntarily asked several questions throughout the
proceeding that were specific to his probation and court fees.
Jury Findings and Recommendation
The jury unanimously found four aggravating factors proven beyond a
reasonable doubt for each of the two murder convictions: (1) Colley was
previously convicted of another capital or violent felony (the contemporaneous
murders and attempted murders); (2) Colley committed each murder while
engaged in the commission of a burglary; (3) each murder was especially heinous,
atrocious, or cruel; and (4) Colley committed each murder in a cold, calculated,
and premeditated manner, without any pretense of moral or legal justification. The
jury found one additional aggravating factor applicable to Amanda’s murder: (5)
Colley committed the murder while subject to a domestic violence injunction and
the victim of the murder was the person who obtained the injunction. After
performing the statutorily required assessment and weighing of aggravating factors
- 12 -
and mitigating circumstances, the jury unanimously recommended that the trial
court impose a death sentence for each murder.
III. Spencer Hearing
The court held a Spencer 2 hearing on October 2, 2018. The State did not put
on any additional evidence at the hearing. The defense called one witness, Sam
Williams, the director of corrections for the St. Johns County sheriff’s office.
Williams testified that he had not heard of Colley causing problems while
incarcerated, other than two minor disciplinary writeups. The court also heard
from Colley himself. Colley said, “This was a horrible, terrible accident and I wish
it was different, but it’s not. And I’m sorry for all parties involved.” The defense
submitted various letters from friends and family.
IV. Sentencing
The trial court held a sentencing hearing on November 30, 2018. The court
found that the State had proven beyond a reasonable doubt all five aggravating
2. Spencer v. State,

James Terry Colley, Jr. v. State of Florida ( 2020 )

Document Info

Authorities (28)