Case ID: so2d_419/html/1058-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "OVERTON, Justice,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Paul William SCOTT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 58588.
    Supreme Court of Florida.
    Sept. 13, 1982.
    Robert M. Leen of Leen & Schneider, Hollywood, for appellant.
    Paul Morris, Miami, Stewart J. Bellus, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
   The Motion for Substitution of Counsel is granted; Leave to Supplement Motion for Rehearing and Brief and Argue the Applicability of Enmund v. Florida, - U.S. -, 102 S.Ct. 3368, 73 L.Ed.2d 1140 is denied. The Motion to Supplement has been treated as a proper Notice of Additional Authority. The Motion for Rehearing, 411 So.2d 866 (Fla.), is denied.

ALDERMAN, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, SUNDBERG and McDONALD, JJ, concur.

OVERTON, J., dissents with an opinion.

OVERTON, Justice,

dissenting.

I dissent from the denial of the petition for rehearing. There is a serious disparity in the sentencing of Scott and his codefend-ant, Kondian, who pleaded guilty to murder and was sentenced to forty-five years imprisonment after the petitioner, Scott, was tried by a jury, convicted of murder, and sentenced to death. Petitioner correctly asserts that we have not addressed this issue in these proceedings. Even when the accomplice has been sentenced subsequent to the sentencing of the defendant seeking review, it is proper for this Court to consider the propriety of disparate sentences, see Witt v. State, 342 So.2d 497, 500 (Fla.1977), to determine whether a death sentence is appropriate given the conduct of all participants in committing the crime. We should consider this issue at this time, rather than wait and see it arise for a second review in a motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. It appears from the record that the trial judge considered the respective roles of Scott and his code-fendant in committing the murder, and this is an issue we can decide in this review.

I would, therefore, grant the petition for rehearing to allow this Court to address the appropriateness of Scott’s death sentence in view of the sentence imposed on his code-fendant. This issue should not be left unresolved.