Florida's four executions so far in 2023

This post analyzes the crimes and cases of each of the four men executed in the State of Florida so far in 2023.

Florida has executed four men so far in 2023:

1. Donald Dillbeck, executed February 23, 2023¹

2. Louis Gaskin, executed April 12, 2023

3. Darryl Barwick, executed May 3, 2023

4. Duane Owen, executed June 15, 2023

Ultimately, it is essentially impossible to “compare” the cases and the crimes because each one involves distinct and complex details. But here’s an analysis of the crimes underlying their sentences of death and their cases.

---

The Crimes

The Tallahassee Democrat reported after Donald Dillbeck’s execution that Gov. DeSantis considers the crime when signing warrants:

DeSantis signed Dillbeck’s death warrant exactly a month ago, on Jan. 23. When asked why Dillbeck, a spokesman pointed to the details of the crime. The COVID-19 pandemic and state emergencies, like hurricanes, contributed to the years-long gap in executions, the spokesman said.

Date of Crimes

All of the crimes were 1990 and earlier. Dillbeck’s crimes were in 1990, Gaskin’s in 1989, Barwick’s in 1986, and Owen’s in 1984.

Location of Crimes

The crimes occurred and were prosecuted across the State. Dillbeck’s were in Leon County, Gaskin’s in Flagler County, Barwick’s in Bay County, and Owen’s in Palm Beach County.

Victims

The victims of each of three of the four men were women. Donald Dillbeck was sentenced to death for stabbing Faye Lamb Vann (44). Darryl Barwick was sentenced to death for stabbing Rebecca Wendt (24). Duane Owen was sentenced to death for attacking Georgianna Worden (38) with a hammer and stabbing Karen Slattery (14).²

Louis Gaskin’s victims were a married couple, Robert Sturmfels (56) and Georgette Sturmfels (55).

---

The Sentences of Death

Each of the executed men spent over 30 years on death row before their executions.

Jury Votes

The jury votes to recommend death have been 8-4 (Dillbeck), 8-4 (Gaskin), 12-0 (Barwick), and 10-2 (Owen).

Date Final

All of the sentences of death became final before June 24, 2002, meaning they were ineligible for Hurst relief.

NOTE: Owen’s sentence of death in his other case, which is not mentioned in the warrant, does not fall in this category and became final after Ring. More here.

Aggravation

Altogether, the aggravating factors of the four cases are fairly similar. All four cases have three aggravating factors in common—(1) the condemned was convicted of a prior violent felony, (2) the crime was especially heinous atrocious, or cruel (HAC), and (3) the murder was committed during a burglary or sexual battery.

The first and third are self-explanatory. To qualify for the HAC aggravator, “the crime must be both conscienceless or pitiless and unnecessarily torturous to the victim.”³ The Florida Supreme Court's caselaw has found this aggravator to apply in a number of circumstances.

Dillbeck and Barwick’s cases have four aggravating factors in common—the three mentioned above as well as the aggravating factor that the crime was committed to avoid arrest.

Gaskin’s and Owen’s cases have four aggravating factors in common—the three mentioned above and the aggravating factor that “the murder was committed in a cold, calculated, and premediated (CCP) manner.”⁴ Like HAC, the Florida Supreme Court's caselaw has found the CCP aggravator to apply in a number of circumstances. The Court has explained this aggravator as follows:

[I]n order to find the CCP aggravator factor . . . the jury must determine that the killing was the product of cool and calm reflection and not an act prompted by emotional frenzy, panic, or a fit of rage (cold), and that the defendant had a careful plan or prearranged design to commit murder before the fatal incident (calculated), and that the defendant exhibited heightened premeditation (premeditated), and that the defendant had no pretense of moral or legal justification.⁵

The Florida Supreme Court has said that CCP “is among the most serious aggravators set out in the statutory sentencing scheme.”⁶

*For Gaskin, HAC was found for only one of the two victims.⁷

**In Barwick’s case, the trial court originally found CCP applied and considered it in sentencing. However, on appeal, the Florida Supreme Court determined that “the trial court erred” in applying that aggravator but that the error was harmless.⁸

***For Owen, the aggravating factors shown are those for the case for which the warrant was issued.

Mitigation

Mitigation is much more difficult to track than aggravation because it does not have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt like aggravation, and there is a statutory catchall for mitigation that does not exist for aggravation. That being said, each of the four—Dillbeck, Gaskin, Barwick, and Owen—had traumatic childhoods and evidence of mental illness.

Dillbeck: The only statutory mitigator in Dillbeck’s case was that he “was substantially impaired.”⁹ However, there were “numerous nonstatutory” mitigating circumstances, including an “abused childhood, fetal alcohol effect, mental illness, the mental illness is treatable, imprisonment at an early age in a violent prison, good-behavior, a loving family, and remorse.”¹⁰

Gaskin: In Gaskin, the trial court found two statutory mitigating circumstances: “(1) the murders were committed while Gaskin was under extreme mental or emotional disturbance, and (2) Gaskin suffered a deprived childhood.”¹¹

Barwick: The trial court in Barwick’s case “found that each potential mitigator proposed by Barwick was either not established by the evidence or was not a significant mitigating circumstance.”¹² However, the lack of mitigation evidence was the subject of Barwick's claims challenging his sentence. In part, in his initial postconviction motion, he argued "that trial counsel failed to present the jury with a true picture of Barwick's extensive mitigation and tragic home life, including years of sexual, physical, and mental abuse, and failed to compile and present to the jury a clear record of Barwick's mental deficiencies, learning disabilities, and psychological problems."¹³

Owen: For the Worden murder, the trial court considered the following mitigation: “Owen's mother died when he was very young; his alcoholic father committed suicide a year later; Owen and his brother were shuffled from one foster home to another until his brother finally ran away and left him; Owen was sexually and otherwise abused in the foster homes; Owen's mind ‘snapped’ during the murder; he had enlisted twice in the army and aspired to be a policeman.”¹⁴ As to the Slattery murder, the trial court considered three statutory mitigating circumstances: “(1) the crime for which the defendant was to be sentenced was committed while he was under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance; (2) the capacity of the defendant to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirement of the law was substantially impaired; and (3) the age of the defendant at the time of the crime was twenty-three.”¹⁵

1. The Dillbeck execution was just before TFDP started.

2. The death warrant was issued for the Worden murder.

3. Buzia v. State, 926 So. 2d 1203, 1211 (Fla. 2006) (quoting Hertz v. State, 803 So. 2d 629, 651 (Fla. 2001)).

4. Hertz, 803 So. 2d at 649.

5. Id. at 649-50 (quoting Jackson v. State, 648 So. 2d 85, 89 (Fla. 1994)).

6. Wood v. State, 209 So. 3d 1217, 1228 (Fla. 2017) (quoting Deparvine v. State, 995 So. 2d 351, 381 (Fla. 2008)).

7. Gaskin v. State, 2023 WL 2799414, at *2 (Fla. Apr. 6, 2023).

8. Barwick v. State, 2023 WL 3151079, at *1 (Fla. Apr. 28, 2023).

9. Dillbeck v. State, 357 So. 3d 94, 97 (Fla. 2023) (citation omitted).

10. Id. (citation omitted).

11. Gaskin, 2023 WL 2799414, at *2.

12. Barwick, 2023 WL 3151079, at *1.

13. Barwick v. State, 88 So. 3d 85, 96 (Fla. 2011).

14. Owen v. State, 596 So. 2d 985, n.2 (Fla. 1992).

15. Owen v. State, 862 So. 2d 687 (Fla. 2003).