Opinion ID: 1671948
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: fields' refusal to testify

Text: Robinson argues that counsel was ineffective for not properly objecting to Fields' refusal to testify at his resentencing. This issue is without merit. Professor Ehrhardt has written that [w]hen a witness refuses to testify concerning the subject matter of a hearsay statement in the face of court order to testify, she is `unavailable' pursuant to section 90.804(1)(b). The trier of fact and the parties are deprived of the testimony of the witness in the same way as when a witness successfully asserts a claim of privilege. Charles W. Ehrhardt, Florida Evidence § 804.1, at 732-33 (1997 ed.)(footnote omitted). Prosecutor Alexander testified at Fields' federal habeas corpus proceeding that just prior to Robinson's resentencing trial, Thomas Cushman, Fields' attorney, told him, Guess what, pal? Fields isn't going to testify for you again. He then reminded Cushman that their agreement was based on Fields' total cooperation, to which Cushman replied, Well, that's too bad.... Fields isn't going to testify any more, and I'm telling him, you know, I'm recommending to him that he not testify. There is no dispute that, beginning with Robinson's resentencing in February 1989, Fields refused to testify for the State against Robinson. Whether this violated the agreement with the State to, in Fields' words, help the State convict Johnny Robinson, is debatable. However, Robinson cannot dispute that the following exchange took place at Fields' April 24, 1986, deposition: Mr. Cushman: There was also a discussion that at the completion and exhaustion of the State appeal remedies, that if necessary, the State would write a letter indicating Mr. Fields' cooperation to the Governor and Cabinet at the Board of Pardons and Parole. Mr. Alexander: Yes, I would, based on the fact that he fully cooperated, and in my opinion told the truth in regards to the matters that occurred during the first couple of weeks of August of 1985. (Emphasis added.) For this reason, there does not appear to be any procurement or wrongdoing on the State's part which would nullify Fields' status as an unavailable witness. § 90.804, Fla. Stat. (1991). Therefore, we find that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying Robinson relief on this issue.