Parker v. State

Supreme Court of Florida

Parker v. State

718 So. 2d 744, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 293, 1998 Fla. LEXIS 945, 1998 WL 268807

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedMay 28, 1998

DocketNo. 89936

StatusPublished

This text of 718 So. 2d 744 (Parker v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Parker v. State, 718 So. 2d 744, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 293, 1998 Fla. LEXIS 945, 1998 WL 268807 (Fla. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Norman Parker, an inmate under sentence of death, appeals an order of the trial court summarily denying relief on his second rule 3.850 motion.¹ We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. We affirm.

The facts are set out fully in our opinion on direct appeal. See Parker v. State, 456 So.2d 436 (Fla.1984). During a cocaine deal in a Miami apartment on July 18, 1978, Norman Parker and an accomplice pulled guns on three men and a woman and forced them to disrobe and lie on a bed. Parker then shot one man in the chest through a pillow and raped the woman. Parker was identified from a photo lineup by the survivors and was arrested the next month after shooting a man in a Washington, D.C., bar. A bullet from the Washington crime matched the bullet from the Florida murder. Parker was convicted in Florida of first-degree murder, sexual battery, and four counts of robbery.

During the penalty phase, the State introduced proof that Parker had twice previously been sentenced to life imprisonment: for a first-degree murder committed in the 1960s, and for a second-degree murder committed in the 1970s. The jury recommended death and the court sentenced him to death based on five aggravating circumstances and no mitigating circumstances.² The court also sentenced him to consecutive life terms on each of the remaining counts. We affirmed the convictions and sentences. Parker v. State, 456 So.2d 436 (Fla.1984). We denied his subsequent petition for writ of habeas corpus, Parker v. Dugger, 537 So.2d 969 (Fla.1988), and affirmed the denial (following an evidentiary hearing) of his first motion for rule 3.850 relief. Parker v. State, 611 So.2d 1224 (Fla.1992).

Parker now appeals the summary denial of his second rule 3.850 motion, raising six issues.³ We find that each of Parker’s claims is procedurally barred for one or more of the following reasons: He failed to object at trial;⁴ he raised the issue on direct appeal;⁵ or he raised the issue in a prior [746]*746motion or petition.⁶ Parker’s claim that trial and appellate counsel were ineffective for failing to litigate these claims is similarly procedurally barred.⁷ We affirm the summary denial of rule 3.850 relief.

It is so ordered.

KOGAN, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, HARDING, WELLS and PARIENTE, JJ., concur. ANSTEAD, J., concurs in result only.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Norman Parker, an inmate under sentence of death, appeals an order of the trial court summarily denying relief on his second rule 3.850 motion.¹ We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. We affirm.

The facts are set out fully in our opinion on direct appeal. See Parker v. State, 456 So.2d 436 (Fla.1984). During a cocaine deal in a Miami apartment on July 18, 1978, Norman Parker and an accomplice pulled guns on three men and a woman and forced them to disrobe and lie on a bed. Parker then shot one man in the chest through a pillow and raped the woman. Parker was identified from a photo lineup by the survivors and was arrested the next month after shooting a man in a Washington, D.C., bar. A bullet from the Washington crime matched the bullet from the Florida murder. Parker was convicted in Florida of first-degree murder, sexual battery, and four counts of robbery.

During the penalty phase, the State introduced proof that Parker had twice previously been sentenced to life imprisonment: for a first-degree murder committed in the 1960s, and for a second-degree murder committed in the 1970s. The jury recommended death and the court sentenced him to death based on five aggravating circumstances and no mitigating circumstances.² The court also sentenced him to consecutive life terms on each of the remaining counts. We affirmed the convictions and sentences. Parker v. State, 456 So.2d 436 (Fla.1984). We denied his subsequent petition for writ of habeas corpus, Parker v. Dugger, 537 So.2d 969 (Fla.1988), and affirmed the denial (following an evidentiary hearing) of his first motion for rule 3.850 relief. Parker v. State, 611 So.2d 1224 (Fla.1992).

Parker now appeals the summary denial of his second rule 3.850 motion, raising six issues.³ We find that each of Parker’s claims is procedurally barred for one or more of the following reasons: He failed to object at trial;⁴ he raised the issue on direct appeal;⁵ or he raised the issue in a prior [746]*746motion or petition.⁶ Parker’s claim that trial and appellate counsel were ineffective for failing to litigate these claims is similarly procedurally barred.⁷ We affirm the summary denial of rule 3.850 relief.

It is so ordered.

KOGAN, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, HARDING, WELLS and PARIENTE, JJ., concur. ANSTEAD, J., concurs in result only.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

718 So. 2d 744, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 293, 1998 Fla. LEXIS 945, 1998 WL 268807, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parker-v-state-fla-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack