D. Getting the Facts
On remand, Mr. Smith’s counsel
sought to depose Judge Tyson for discovery purposes. The State
sought to quash the subpeona. Judge Speiser denied the State’s
request. The State sought and obtained review of Judge Speiser’s
decision by the Florida Supreme Court. The case was consolidated
with another capital case (State
v. Lewis) from Broward County in which CCR case had successfully
sought to depose the trial judge. Ultimately, the Florida Supreme
Court ruled that post-conviction discovery was permitted under
certain circumstances and remanded to permit Judge Speiser to
determine whether to permit the deposition. State
v. Lewis, 656 So.2d 1248 (Fla. 1994).
Judge Speiser permitted the deposition.
Thereafter in August of 1996, an evidentiary hearing was held
to get the facts. Martin McClain, Tom Dunn, Paul Zacks, and Judge
Tyson all testified. Mr. Zacks and Judge Tyson acknowledged ex
parte contact had occurred. Mr. Zacks claimed that Mr. Dunn had
consented in advance to the ex parte procedure, and Judge Tyson
claimed that Mr. McClain had consented to the ex parte procedure.
Mr. Dunn, who had been involved in Desert Storm at the time of
the ex parte contact, testified that he did not consentin December
of 1989 and that he was not in the country in March of 1991.
Mr. McClain testified that he did not consent to the ex parte
procedure and would not have.
Judge Speiser determined that
it was not for him to resolve the factual issues. He simply ordered
the transcripts from the proceeding sent to the Florida Supreme
Court. After briefing, the Florida Supreme Court determined oral
argument was not necessary and ruled that the case was controlled
by Rose
as Mr. Smith had asserted in 1992. Judge Tyson’s order denying
relief was vacated and the matter was remanded for a new evidentiary
hearing on the Chiquita Lowe affidavit before Judge Speiser.
Smith
v. State, 708 So.2d 253 (Fla. 1998).
| Back
to Mainpage | Back to Top |