Stay of Execution
Governor John Ellis (Jeb) Bush
The Capitol
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0001
Re: Gregory Mills
Dear Governor Bush:
On behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union, we urge you to stay the execution of Gregory Mills, which is currently scheduled for May 2, 2001. Such extraordinary relief is merited by the circumstances of Mr. Mills' case.
Evidence that has surfaced after Mr. Mills' conviction casts serious doubt on the credibility of the State's key trial witness, a man named Vincent Ashley. Mr. Ashley was originally a co-defendant of Mr. Mills who later became Mr. Mills' chief accuser in return for a grant of immunity. At trial, Mr. Ashley testified that both of them entered the victim's house, and that Mr. Mills shot the victim. In post-conviction interviews, however, Mr. Ashley denied having entered the house at all, but suggested that he, not Mr. Mills, was the gunman. In addition, a man who was a prisoner in the Seminole County Jail at the same time as Vincent Ashley recently provided an affidavit swearing that Mr. Ashley told him that he, not Mr. Mills, was the gunman, and that Mr. Mills possessed no gun at all at the time of the shooting.
After hearing the evidence at Mr. Mills' trial and assessing the credibility of the State's witnesses, moreover, the jury that convicted him of felony-murder recommended a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for at least 25 years. The trial court judge nevertheless rejected the jury's recommendation and imposed a sentence of death instead. Since the death penalty was reinstated in Florida, this State's appellate courts have viewed such "jury override" cases with a very skeptical eye. Of 142 such cases to reach the Florida Supreme Court between 1974 and 2000, 103, or 72.5%, have been reversed. Indeed, the affirmance of the jury override in Mr. Mills' case is the only affirmance of a jury override involving a conviction for felony-murder during that entire quarter century period. It is well-established in Florida that a judge should override a jury's recommendation of life imprisonment only when "the facts suggesting a sentence of death [are] so clear and convincing that virtually no reasonable person could differ." Tedder v. State, 322 So. 2d 908, 910 (Fla. 1975). Here, however, the trial court never even attempted to demonstrate why it apparently considered the jury's recommendation of life imprisonment to be unreasonable, nor did it discuss or make any findings about whether the jury's life recommendation could have been reasonably supported by the record.
It has also come to light recently that State prosecutors apparently drafted, on an ex parte basis, the trial court's opinion summarily denying Mr. Mills' motion to vacate judgment and sentence. If Mr. Mills' counsel are provided the opportunity to demonstrate that that opinion was in fact prepared by the State on an ex-parte basis, then they can establish a clear violation of Mr. Mills' due process rights on this ground alone.
The ACLU opposes capital punishment in all cases as a barbarous anachronism and in violation of the U.S. Constitution. In Mr. Mills' case, newly-discovered evidence casts serious doubt whether Mr. Mills was the gunman; the trial court overrode a jury's recommendation of life without an adequate basis; and the prosecutors' apparent ex parte preparation of the order summarily denying Mr. Mills' motion to vacate, if established, would have violated Mr. Mills' constitutional rights. In light of these and other facts - not least the fact that Mr. Mills is showing strong signs of rehabilitation - we respectfully urge you to stay his scheduled execution on May 2.
Sincerely,
Diann Rust-Tierney
ACLU Capital Punishment Project
James V. Dick
Pro Bono Counsel
Squire, Sanders & Dempsey L.L.P.
