Opinion ID: 2052589
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Whether the State is Estopped From Submitting Felony Murder as a Statutory Eligibility Factor at a Future Capital Sentencing Proceeding

Text: Defendant raises a parallel argument that the State should be estopped from pursuing the felony-murder eligibility factor at a subsequent death penalty sentencing proceeding. Defendant maintains that defendant's acquittal of felony murder at the guilt/innocence phase of the first trial precludes retrial of any issues material to the felony-murder eligibility factor that were conclusively decided at the first trial. Double jeopardy incorporates the doctrine of collateral estoppel in criminal proceedings. Schiro v. Farley, 510 U.S. 222, 232, 114 S.Ct. 783, 790, 127 L.Ed.2d 47, 58 (1994). Collateral estoppel, [3] or issue preclusion, means    that when an issue of ultimate fact has once been determined by a valid and final judgment, that issue cannot again be litigated between the same parties in any future lawsuit. Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436, 443, 90 S.Ct. 1189, 1194, 25 L.Ed.2d 469, 475 (1970). The party seeking to invoke the collateral estoppel doctrine must show: (1) that the issue was raised and litigated in a previous proceeding; (2) that the determination of the issue was a critical and necessary part of the final judgment in the prior trial; (3) that the issue sought to be precluded in a later trial is the same one decided in the previous trial. Bailin, 977 F.2d at 280; Delap v. Dugger, 890 F.2d 285, 314 (11th Cir. 1989). Defendant bears the burden of proving that the issue whose relitigation he seeks to foreclose was actually decided in the initial proceeding. Schiro, 510 U.S. at 233, 114 S.Ct. at 791, 127 L.Ed.2d at 59. We need not apply all three factors of the issue preclusion test to decide this case. Record evidence cannot satisfy the second prong of the test, since there was no disposition of the felony-murder charge in the first trial. Issue preclusion assumes that the issue in question was actually decided, as would occur in the event of an acquittal. Schiro, 510 U.S. at 232, 114 S.Ct. at 790, 127 L.Ed.2d at 58; Ashe, 397 U.S. at 443, 90 S.Ct. at 1194, 25 L.Ed.2d at 475. Here, defendant cannot legitimately argue that any question of felony murder was determined by a valid and final judgment ( Ashe, 397 U.S. at 443, 90 S.Ct. at 1194, 25 L.Ed.2d at 475); at the first trial, the issue was never submitted to the jury, and neither the court nor the jury rendered any findings related to felony murder. We find, therefore, that defendant's argument lacks merit.