Opinion ID: 2671262
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: CCRC-Middle Region

Text: On June 9, 2003, CCRC-Middle Region entered a notice of appearance in state postconviction court, replacing the Southern Region office as counsel for Lugo. Almost four months later, and three days before Lugo’s convictions became final on direct review, CCRC-Middle Region filed a motion to withdraw based on a conflict of interest. That October 3, 2003 motion stated that the CCRC-Middle Region’s lead investigator had a personal conflict of interest because she feared 2 Under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851(b)(1), the Florida Supreme Court, upon issuance of its mandate affirming a sentence of death, issues “an order appointing the appropriate office of the Capital Collateral Regional Counsel or directing the trial court to immediately appoint counsel from the Registry of Attorneys maintained by the Justice Administrative Commission.” Since 1997, there have been three CCRC regional offices — Northern, Middle and Southern. See Am. Bar Ass’n, Evaluating Fairness and Accuracy in State Death Penalty Systems: The Florida Death Penalty Assessment Report 235 (2006) (2006 ABA Report), available at http://www.americanbar.org/groups/individual_rights/projects/death_ penalty_due_process_review_project/death_penalty_assessments/florida.html; see also Fla. Stat. § 27.701. Each CCRC office is responsible for representing persons convicted and sentenced to death by state courts, within their respective regions, in collateral proceedings in state and federal court. See Fla. Stat. § 27.702(1)–(2). On July 1, 2003, however, CCRC-Northern was closed by the Florida legislature as part of a pilot program, and its responsibilities were transferred to a panel of registry attorneys, compiled and maintained by the Florida Commission on Capital Cases. Am. Bar Ass’n, supra, at 235. More recently, the Florida legislature enacted the Timely Justice Act of 2013, effective July 1, 2013, which, among other things, reopened the CCRCNorthern office. See 2013 Fla. Sess. Law Serv. Ch. 2013–216 (West) (codified in scattered sections of the Fla. Code). 4 Case: 11-13439 Date Filed: 04/24/2014 Page: 5 of 53 that conducting an investigation in Lugo’s case could endanger members of her family in Colombia. For that reason, and pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 27.703(1), CCRC-Middle Region asked to be permitted to withdraw and for the court to appoint in its place conflict-free registry counsel qualified under Fla. Stat. §§ 27.710 and 27.711. On October 22, 2003, the state postconviction court denied CCRC-Middle Region’s motion to withdraw. But later, on December 18, 2003, at a court proceeding where Lugo was not present, that court allowed CCRC-Middle Region to withdraw. 3 Although the record of that proceeding indicates that CCRC-Middle Region’s investigator met with Lugo at least twice and that the agency began collecting records about his case, there is nothing else in it about the extent of CCRC-Middle Region’s efforts on Lugo’s behalf before it withdrew.