Supreme Court of Florida





____________




No. SC03-1241


____________





GERALD DELANE MURRAY ,

Appellant,



vs.




STATE OF FLORIDA ,

Appellee.



[January 30, 2009]



PER CURIAM.



We have on appeal the judgment of the trial court convicting appellant Gerald Murray of first-degree murder and sentencing him to death.1 For the reasons that follow, we affirm his conviction and sentence.






I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND


This is the third direct appeal following the fourth trial and third conviction of Gerald Murray for the September 1990 murder of fifty-nine-year-old Alice Vest.


In his first trial in 1994, the jury found Murray guilty of first-degree murder, burglary of a dwelling with assault, and ***ual battery and recommended death by












1. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.




- 1 -

a vote of eleven to one. The trial court followed the jury's recommendation and sentenced Murray to death. On appeal, this Court reversed the convictions and sentences and remanded the case for a new trial because of the erroneous qualification of an expert witness who testified as to DNA evidence and the improper admission of DNA evidence at trial. See Murray v. State, 692 So. 2d 157, 157-58 (Fla. 1997).




Murray was retried in March 1998, but that trial ended in a mistrial due to a hung jury. He was then tried a third time in February 1999, and the jury convicted him of first-degree murder, burglary with assault, and ***ual battery, and recommended death by a vote of twelve to zero. On appeal, this Court once again reversed because of the improper admission of DNA evidence. See Murray v. State, 838 So. 2d 1073, 1077 (Fla. 2002). Murray had his fourth trial in 2003 and he was again convicted of first-degree murder, burglary with assault, and ***ual battery.




The evidence presented at the fourth trial revealed that on September 15, 1990, the victim, Alice Vest, arrived home around 11:30 p.m. after having dinner with a friend. When her friend called the next morning on September 16, however, Ms. Vest did not answer the phone. Concerned, the friend called one of Ms. Vest's neighbors and asked him to check on her. The neighbor went to Ms. Vest's home and observed that one of her window screens was out of the window and that her







- 2 -

screen door was propped open. Her phone lines had been cut. After telling his wife to call 911, the neighbor and another man looked inside the home and discovered Ms. Vest's body draped off of her bed with her head on the floor.




According to the medical examiner's testimony, the cause of death was strangulation with multiple stab wounds as a contributing factor. Ms. Vest was also badly beaten with a metal bar, a candlestick holder, and a broken bottle that left bruising around her neck, breasts, and knees. She also had a black eye, a broken jaw, multiple contusions, and at least twenty-four stab wounds over her face, neck, upper and lower back, abdomen and thigh. Most of the stab wounds were knife wounds, but some were consistent with infliction by a pair of scissors found near her body. Ms. Vest had been strangled with a web belt and two electrical cords. She was also both vaginally and anally raped.




According to James Fisher, earlier on September 15, 1990, Murray, Steve Taylor,2 and Fisher played pool together after which, at around 11:50 p.m., Fisher dropped Murray and Taylor off at a corner less than a mile from Murray's home.


Fisher then went home and went to bed.















2. In 1992, Taylor was tried for Vest's murder and was convicted of first- degree murder, burglary of a dwelling, and ***ual battery. Following the jury's recommendation, the trial court sentenced Taylor to death. On appeal, this Court affirmed Taylor's convictions and sentence. See Taylor v. State, 630 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 1993).








- 3 -





Juanita White, who lived approximately two miles from the victim's house, testified that, around 12:40 a.m., she saw Murray and Taylor in her barn and watched the men run away after she sent her dog to attack them. Murray's brother further testified that both Taylor and Murray left town the next day.




Evidence recovered from the scene of the crime included six footprints, five from a Britannia shoe, which Taylor was known to wear, and one that was unidentified. No fingerprints were recovered from the scene that could be tied to either Taylor or Murray. Semen was found inside the victim but the results were inconclusive. Semen was also discovered on a blouse and on a comforter and was found to be the same blood type as Taylor but not Murray. None of the blood spatters at the scene could be tied to either Taylor or Murray. But pubic hairs recovered from the victim's body and from a nightgown were found to have the same microscopic characteristics as Murray's pubic hair, but not Taylor's. Jewelry stolen from the victim's home was linked to both Taylor and Murray.




Additional evidence presented at trial revealed that approximately six months after his indictment for the murder of Alice Vest, Murray escaped from prison. One of his co-escapees, Anthony Smith, testified that, while out, Murray told him about his role in Vest's murder. According to Smith, Murray said that on the night of the murder Taylor came over to his house and wanted to go out.


Murray initially refused, but Taylor was eventually able to change his mind after







- 4 -

the two drank some beer. Thereafter, Taylor convinced Murray to break into a house. Together, the pair broke into what Murray thought was an unoccupied residence. When Murray discovered the owner was home, he wanted to leave, but Taylor grabbed the female occupant, handed Murray a knife, and ***ually assaulted her. Afterwards, Murray had the victim perform oral *** on him.


Murray then wandered through the house looking for things to steal. He returned to the bedroom five or ten minutes later and discovered that Taylor had stabbed the victim about fifteen or sixteen times but she was not dead. Murray and Taylor then secured some sort of cord and, together, they choked the woman to death. After they killed her, they took whatever was valuable and left. Approximately seven months after his escape, Murray was captured in Las Vegas, Nevada.


The jury in Murray's fourth trial reached a verdict of guilty as charged on all counts. During the penalty phase, the State introduced evidence of Murray's other violent felonies. But, pursuant to Murray's instructions, the defense did not introduce any mitigation evidence. After the penalty phase closing arguments, the jury recommended a death sentence by a vote of eleven to one.


Thereafter, the court held a Spencer3 hearing and Murray again declined to present any mitigation evidence. The next day, the trial court followed the jury's recommendation and sentenced Murray to death, finding that the aggravators










3.



See Spencer v. State, 615 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 1993).








- 5 -

outweighed the mitigating circumstances. Specifically, the trial court found four aggravating factors: (1) Murray was previously convicted of three felonies involving violence (great weight); (2) he was engaged in a burglary and/or ***ual battery at the time of the commission of the murder (immense weight); (3) the crime was committed for financial gain (some weight); and (4) the crime was especially heinous, atrocious and cruel (great weight). The trial court rejected two statutory mitigating circumstances: (1) the crime was committed by another person, and Murray's participation was relatively minor; and (2) Murray's capacity to appreciate the criminality of his conduct was substantially impaired. However, the trial court found the following nonstatutory mitigating circumstances: (1) the untimely death of Murray's wife (very little weight); (2) Murray was incapable of forming relationships with people (very slight weight); (3) he had problems as a youth (little weight); (4) his lack of education and little contact with his father (slight weight); and (5) his mental evaluation after his arrest for aggravated assault (little weight). This appeal followed.




II. ISSUES RAISED ON APPEAL



Murray claims that: (A) the trial court erred by admitting hair evidence recovered from the victim's body; (B) the trial court erred by admitting hair evidence recovered from the victim's nightgown; (C) the trial court erred by admitting the testimony of a hair and fiber expert and limiting Murray's cross-