Opinion ID: 2686798
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: the state’s rebuttal penalty phase evidence

Text: As rebuttal, the State called Detective Roberto Navarro of the Miami Police Department. A week after the murder, Detective Navarro arrested Mendoza at his parents’ home and brought Mendoza to the police station. There, he and another officer interrogated Mendoza for approximately four hours. Detective Navarro asked Mendoza “if he used drugs or alcohol.” Mendoza “said he did not.” Detective Navarro had no trouble speaking with Mendoza— 11 The record does not tell us exactly what the pending charges were. The Florida Supreme Court, on direct appeal, concluded the trial court erred in allowing the State to bring up “pending charges” while cross-examining Dr. Toomer. Nevertheless, the state supreme court found this error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. See Mendoza I, 700 So. 2d at 677–78. 21 Case: 13-14968 Date Filed: 07/31/2014 Page: 22 of 58 Mendoza did not appear to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol and “understood and answered clearly and exhibited the processes of a normal person.” Mendoza’s memory appeared to be accurate and Mendoza “was very relaxed.”