NEW WARRANT: Anthony Wainwright's execution scheduled June 10
Gov. DeSantis has signed a death warrant scheduling Anthony F. Wainwright’s execution for June 10 at 6:00 p.m.
Gov. DeSantis has signed a death warrant scheduling Anthony F. Wainwright’s execution for June 10 at 6:00 p.m.
Shortly after the Governor issued the warrant, the Florida Supreme Court issued its standard scheduling order for warrant-related litigation. The Orders sets forth the following schedule:
May 20 at noon: Trial court proceedings completed
May 20 at 4:00 p.m.: Notice of appeal and petitions due
May 23 at 3:00 p.m.: Initial brief due
May 27 at 10:00 a.m.: Answer brief due
May 28 at 10:00 a.m.: Reply brief due
The warrant and full scheduling order can be found on the Court’s docket here.
Background of Wainwright’s Case
Trial & Direct Appeal
In 1995, a Hamilton County jury convicted Wainwright of murdering Carmen Gayheart in 1994. The Florida Supreme Court explained the crimes as follows:
Anthony Wainwright and Richard Hamilton escaped from prison in North Carolina, stole a Cadillac and guns, and drove to Florida. In Lake City, the two decided to steal another car and on April 27, 1994, accosted Carmen Gayheart, a young mother of two, at gunpoint as she loaded groceries into her Ford Bronco in a Winn–Dixie parking lot. They stole the Bronco and headed north on I–75. They raped, strangled, and executed Gayheart by shooting her twice in the back of the head, and were arrested the next day in Mississippi following a shootout with police.
Upon arrest, Wainwright revealed to officers that he had AIDS and in subsequent statements admitted to raping Mrs. Gayheart despite his illness after kidnapping and robbing her. He claimed, however, that it was Hamilton who strangled and shot her.1
Wainwright was sentenced to death following the jury’s unanimous recommendation for death.2
In its Sentencing Order (attached to the warrant), the trial court determined the following aggravating factors were proven beyond a reasonable doubt:
The capital felony was committed by a person under sentence of imprisonment or placed on community control.
Wainwright was previously convicted of another capital felony or of a felony involving the use or threat of violence to the person.
The capital felony was committed while Wainwright was engaged, or an accomplice, in the commission of, or an attempt to commit, or flight after committing or attempting to commit, any robbery, sexual batters, arson, burglary, kidnapping, or aircraft piracy or the unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructing device or bomb.
The capital felony was committed for the purpose of avoiding or preventing a lawful arrest or effecting an escape from custody.
The capital felony was especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel.
The capital felony was a homicide and was committed in a cold, calculated, and premeditated manner without any pretense of moral or legal justification.
The trial court did not find that any statutory mitigator was established. Ultimately, the trial court sentenced Wainwright to death:
Wainwright’s codefendant, Hamilton, was also sentenced to death and died on Florida’s death row in January 2023.
On direct appeal, Wainwright raised nine issues. On November 13, 1997, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed Wainwright’s conviction and death sentence. His sentence became final in May 1998.
Initial Postconviction & Habeas Petitions
Wainwright filed 14 claims in his initial postconviction motion. The circuit court held an evidentiary hearing on five of the claims but ultimately denied relief on all claims. On appeal, Wainwright raised eight issues. On November 24, 2004, the Florida Supreme Court issued a decision affirming the circuit court’s denial. The Court only discussed three issues:
(1) whether trial counsel was ineffective regarding the admission of additional DNA evidence; (2) whether trial counsel was ineffective regarding Wainwright's statements and admissions; and (3) whether initial counsel was ineffective in his pretrial representation of Wainwright.
Wainwright had also filed petitions for writ of habeas corpus raising four issues. The Court determined that only one was worth discussing—that Florida’s capital sentencing scheme was unconstitutional under Ring v. Arizona. The Court denied both petitions.
Federal Habeas
On March 29, 2005, Wainwright filed a federal petition for habeas corpus. On March 10, 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida determined the petition was untimely.3 In November 2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed that determination.4
First Successive Postconviction Motion
On July 16, 2007, Wainwright filed a successive motion for postconviction relief, raising a newly discovered evidence claim related to “a written statement” in which Hamilton “asserted that ‘Wainwright was not involved in any manner of [sic] the sexual assault committed upon the victim in this case.’”5 In the statement, “Hamilton explained that he came forward because ‘I do not feel comfortable with [Wainwright] being convicted with this felony when [I] was the sole perpetrator, nor do [I] feel justice is served by allowing this felony to exist against him when it is false.’”6
The circuit court denied Wainwright’s claim. On November 26, 2008, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial.
Second Successive Postconviction Motion
“On May 26, 2009, Wainwright filed a second successive motion for postconviction relief, raising a newly discovered evidence claim based on past medical and educational records and allegedly new neuropsychological evidence. Wainwright claimed that this evidence would show that his mental age at the time of the murder was below eighteen years.”7 NOTE: This is similar to the claim James Ford raised just before his execution earlier this year.
The circuit court summarily denied Wainwright's motion. On May 6, 2010, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial, determining “Wainwright's allegation is insufficient to support a newly discovered evidence claim.”
Third-Fifth Successive Postconviction Motions
Wainwright filed third, fourth, and fifth successive postconviction motions. The circuit court denied each motion. Wainwright did not appeal those denials.
Sixth Successive Postconviction Motion
On April 6, 2015, Wainwright filed his sixth successive postconviction motion. The circuit court denied the motion as untimely and procedurally barred. Wainwright appealed, claiming:
“the circuit court erred in summarily denying his claim that pretrial counsel, Victor Africano, misadvised him that the plea agreement required him to pass a polygraph test proving that he did not rape and kill the victim, which allegedly caused him to reject the plea agreement”
“the circuit court erred in summarily denying his claim that he was deprived of a fair trial when the trial court permitted the State to introduce DNA evidence that was not disclosed to the defense until after opening statements”
“the circuit court erred in summarily denying his claim that the imposition of the death penalty violated his Sixth Amendment right to trial by jury”
“the circuit court erred in summarily denying his claim that he was denied a fair trial by an impartial jury when a juror with pending criminal charges was permitted to serve until the tenth day of trial”
On January 30, 2017, the Florida Supreme Court issued a decision affirming the denial.8 Wainwright was not entitled to Hurst relief because his sentence was final before 2002.9
Recent Federal Litigation
On June 5, 2018, the Capital Habeas Unit of the Federal Defender's Office for the Northern District of Florida filed a motion to be appointed as habeas counsel for Mr. Wainwright. The district court granted the motion on June 22, 2018. Almost a year later, on June 21, 2019, the CHU filed a Rule 60(b) motion on Mr. Wainwright's behalf. 10
The motion asserted the following claims:
“the matter of equitable tolling should be revisited”
“there were independent grounds for granting him relief from his conviction and death sentence through Rule 60(b)” because he’s “actually innocent” of the murder
The federal trial court denied the motion. On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit held an oral argument. On July 18, 2023, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial, ultimately determining that Wainwright could not get past the untimeliness of his original petition.
Seventh Successive Postconviction Motion
In 2022, Wainwright filed a seventh successive postconviction motion raising the following claims: (1) Wainwright obtained newly discovered evidence in the form of written jury questions asked at trial and incorrectly answered by the trial court, and (2) the trial court committed fundamental error by considering extra-record evidence when imposing the death sentence. Shortly after the motion was filed, in July 2022, the circuit court summarily denied the claim.
After his counsel informed him “that he would not be appealing the trial court’s ruling,” Wainwright filed a pro se appeal of the circuit court’s denial. Wainwright sought to get a new counsel, which was denied. And the Florida Supreme Court ultimately dismissed the appeal as unauthorized.
The filings for this case can be found here.
My thoughts are with everyone involved in the warrant- and execution-related process.
Wainwright v. State, 704 So. 2d 511, 512 (Fla. 1997).
Id.
Wainwright v. McDonough, 2006 WL 8449862, at *3 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 10, 2006).
Wainwright v. Sec’y, Dep’t of Corrs., 537 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir. 2007).
Wainwright v. State, 2 So. 3d 948, 949 (Fla. 2008).
Id. at 949-50.
Wainwright v. State, 43 So. 3d 45, *1 (Fla. 2010).
Wainwright v. State, 2017 WL 394509 (Fla. Jan. 30, 2017).
Wainwright v. Sec’y, Dep’t of Corrs., 2023 WL 4582786 (11th Cir. 2023).
Well deserved punishment.