WARRANT: Ford files postconviction motion ahead of scheduled execution
James Ford's execution is scheduled for February 13. 1`Yesterday, Ford filed a successive motion for postconviction relief in the circuit court. The State filed its response today.
James Ford’s execution is scheduled for 6:00 p.m. on Thursday, February 13, 2025—the first for the State in 2025. Over the weekend, he filed a successive motion for postconviction relief.
Last week, Ford demanded public records from several State agencies, all of which objected to the request. After a hearing, the Charlotte County circuit court sustained the objections and denied Ford’s requests.
Ford’s Motion
Consistent with the circuit court’s scheduling order, on Sunday, Ford filed a successive motion for postconviction relief in the circuit court.
In the Motion, Ford raises two claims.
First, Ford argues that his death sentence is unconstitutional under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments pursuant to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Roper v. Simmons because Ford’s mental and developmental age was below 18 at the time of the crimes underlying his sentence of death. Ford argues that even now, “at the age of 65, Ford’s impairments in mental functioning persist, and an evidentiary hearing is needed to put forth expert testimony concerning Ford’s current mental impairments.”
Second, Ford argues that his sentence of death because of the jury’s nonunanimous recommendation for death. This argument addresses the fact that Ford missed the deadline for Hurst relief by less than 30 days—as I previously mentioned.
A full copy of the Motion can be downloaded here.
State’s Response
On Monday, the State filed its response to Ford’s Motion. In its Response, the State argues that Ford’s claims are untimely and should be summarily denied. In addition, the State argues that Ford’s arguments have no merit.
First, on Ford’s Roper claim, the State argues that it is based on testing that was conducted in 1999 and should have at least been raised within one year of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2005 decision in Roper. Further, the State argues that the claim is without merit because he was in his thirties when he committed the murders in this case and, therefore, Roper does not apply. On the Atkins-related part of Ford’s claim, the State argues that Ford asks the Court to improperly expand the protections of the Eighth Amendment.
Second, on Ford’s claim regarding the jury’s nonunanimous recommendation for death, the State argues that “[t]his is Ford’s third attempt to challenge his sentences” on this basis. Even if Erlinger constituted a new rule, the State argues, it is inapplicable here and “did not address capital sentencing at all.” Further, the State argues that this claim fails under binding precedent.
A full copy of the State’s Response can be downloaded here.
Per the circuit court’s scheduling order, the Court will determine tomorrow whether an evidentiary hearing is necessary on Ford’s claims. The Court will rule on Ford’s Motion on January 24.
TFDP Prior Coverage of the Ford Warrant
My thoughts are with everyone involved in the warrant- and execution-related process.