John Mosley, Jr. resentenced to death after Hurst resentencing
On July 7, Mosley (whose case was the lead for the Florida Supreme Court applying Hurst retroactively to a certain class of cases) was resentenced to death following a jury's 12-0 recommendation.
John Mosley, Jr.’s case was the lead case in 2016 for the Florida Supreme Court granting retroactive relief of Hurst to those whose sentences of death became final after June 24, 2002—the day the U.S. Supreme Court decided Ring v. Arizona. In his post-Hurst resentencing in December 2019, a jury unanimously recommended death. He was resentenced to death this week.
Background
After a trial in 2005, John Mosley, Jr.1 was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder for crimes that occurred in 2004. On one count, the jury recommended a sentence of life imprisonment without parole. On the other, the jury recommended a sentence of death by a vote of 8-4. The judge followed the jury’s recommendations, and Mosley was sentenced to death for one count.
On direct appeal in 2009, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed Mosley’s sentence of death. His sentence became final in 2010 when the U.S. Supreme Court denied his petition for writ of certiorari.
After Hurst in 2016—as explained further in Part III of the TFDP five-part series on Hurst (available here)—Mosley’s case was the lead case for the Florida Supreme Court’s holding that Hurst applies retroactively to sentences of death that became final after June 24, 2002, the day that the U.S. Supreme Court decided Ring v. Arizona. Thus, because the jury’s vote to recommend death was non-unanimous in Mosley’s case, the Court vacated his sentence of death and remanded for a new penalty phase.
2019 Resentencing
Mosley’s resentencing proceeding took place in December 2019—before Florida’s new capital sentencing statute went into effect. Therefore, Florida’s 2017, post-Hurst statute applied to his resentencing, and the jury was required to make several findings unanimously and to ultimately make a unanimous recommendation for death.
On December 9, 2019, the jury unanimously recommended death.
The full verdict form can be found here.
Post-Trial Litigation
After the penalty phase, a lot of litigation occurred between the jury’s verdict and sentencing this week. In December 2019, a motion for new penalty phase was filed. That document is not publicly available, but it was denied in January 2020.
2019 Pro Se Petition
On December 30, 2019, Mosley filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus in the Florida Supreme Court (No. SC2019-2169), in which he sought to disqualify the Judge.
The Florida Supreme Court issued an Order to Show Cause why the petition is not unauthorized, to which Mosley responded. The Court denied the Petition on January 29, 2020, and denied Mosley’s Motion for Rehearing.
Appeal of Trial Court’s 2020 Judgment
In the trial court, on January 23, 2020, Mosley filed an Unequivocal Demand to Immediately Represent Myself Pro Se.
On January 27, 2020, Mosley again filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus in the Florida Supreme Court.
On January 30, 2020, the trial court entered a judgment sentencing Mosley to death.
An appeal of that judgment was filed at the Florida Supreme Court, through counsel, on February 10, 2020. The Initial Brief presented six issues:
The court abused its discretion in preventing Mosley from cross-examining the key witness against him about that witness’s motivation to testify and in telling the jury that there was no potential that the witness could benefit from testifying.
The trial court erred in granting a State objection when Defendant attempted to introduce mitigation evidence that his father had sexually abused his two sisters.
The trial court failed to address Mosley’s unequivocal request to represent himself at a sentencing hearing prior to hearing argument on, and denying, a defense motion for a new penalty phase, and then imposing sentence.
The trial court violated established procedures for the Spencer hearing by imposing sentence without any recess, without the benefit of sentencing memos, and before a sentencing order was prepared.
Fundamental error occurred when the trial court failed to instruct the jury to determine beyond a reasonable doubt that aggravating factors were sufficient to justify death and that the aggravating factors outweighed the mitigating circumstances.
The court erred in refusing to consider Mr. Mosley’s motion based on newly discovered evidence about a key witness in the penalty phase trial.
Oral argument was held on June 2, 2021. It can be viewed here.
On September 15, 2022, the Florida Supreme Court vacated the 2020 sentence of death and remanded solely for a new Spencer hearing and a new sentencing hearing.2 The Court’s reasoning was based on the trial court’s “fail[ure] to address Mosley’s unequivocal motion to represent himself at his Spencer hearing.” (Footnote omitted.)
The Court denied relief on all other claims. The majority was written by Justice Couriel. Chief Justice Muniz concurred in part and dissented in part.3
2023 Sentence
After several continuances, a new Spencer hearing was held on May 31, 2023. Sentencing occurred Friday, July 7, where Mosley was resentenced to death.
News articles
It appears from DOC records that Mosley has a son, John F. Mosley III, who is also in Florida prison.
The term “Spencer hearing” references the Supreme Court of Florida’s 1993 decision in Spencer v. State, in which the Court held that the following process should be followed after the penalty phase:
First, the trial judge should hold a hearing to: a) give the defendant, his counsel, and the State, an opportunity to be heard; b) afford, if appropriate, both the State and the defendant an opportunity to present additional evidence; c) allow both sides to comment on or rebut information in any presentence or medical report; and d) afford the defendant an opportunity to be heard in person. Second, after hearing the evidence and argument, the trial judge should then recess the proceeding to consider the appropriate sentence. If the judge determines that the death sentence should be imposed, then, in accordance with section 921.141, Florida Statutes (1983), the judge must set forth in writing the reasons for imposing the death sentence. Third, the trial judge should set a hearing to impose the sentence and contemporaneously file the sentencing order.