The Commission on Capital Cases was not funded in the FY 2011-2012 General Appropriations Act, and the Commission ceased operations on June 30, 2011. This site and the Commission website are being retained to provide access to historical materials.

The Registry Attorneys will be continued by the Justice Administration Commission.

These actions are effective July 1, 2011.

Disclaimer: The Commission on Capital Cases receives this information from a variety of sources. The site will be updated consistently as information is received and will be audited bi-annually. We make every attempt to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, the information should be verified by the applicable court prior to using it for legal or statistical purposes.


Last NameFirst NamePictureDC NumberAgencyCase Summary
RoseMilo 090411Registry/Federal; Pro SeCase Summary

Last Action

DateCourtCase NumberLast Action
4/20/2010USCA10-11848Habeas Appeal filed
8/18/2010USCA10-11848Application for Certificate of Appealability denied in part and granted in part
3/4/2011USCA10-11848USCA affirmed the denial of the Habeas Petition
9/1/2006USDC-M93-11692nd Amended Habeas Petition filed
3/19/2010USDC-M93-1169Petition denied
4/19/2010USDC-M93-1169Application for Certificate of Appealability was filed
6/30/2010USDC-M93-1169Application denied

Current Attorney

Last NameFirst NameCityAddressZipPhoneEMail
BrunvandBjorn E.Clearwater, FL615 Turner St.33756-5004727/446-7505Email


Last NameCase NumberJudgeCountyCCRCOrder DateContract Date

Last Updated

2008-01-09 11:43:13.0

Case Summary
Direct Links

The Commission on Capital Cases updates this information regularly

The Commission on Capital Cases updates thisinformation regularly.  This information, however, is subject to changeand may not reflect the latest status of an inmate’s case and should not berelied upon for statistical or legal purposes. 


ROSE, Milo (B/M)

DC #    090411

DOB:   01/25/50


­­­Sixth Judicial Circuit, Pinellas County, Case #82-8683

Sentencing Judge: The Honorable Susan Schaeffer

Attorney, Trial: Darryl Rousen – Special Assistant PublicDefender

Attorney, Direct Appeal: Paul C. Helm – Assistant PublicDefender

Attorney, Collateral Appeals:  Bjorn Brunvand –Registry/Federal; Pro Se in State filings


Date of Offense: 10/18/82

Date of Sentence: 07/08/83


Circumstances of Offense:


Milo Rose was convicted and sentenced to death for themurder of Robert Richardson.


On 10/18/82, Milo Rose, who was living with RobertRichardson’s mother, struck Richardson on the head with a concrete block,killing him.  Witnesses testified that the area was well lit so they wereable to clearly see Rose.  The witnesses testified that earlier that nightthey had seen Rose and Richardson walking down the street and heard the soundof breaking glass.  They observed Richardson lying on the ground and Rosepicking up a concrete block.  He picked the concrete block up over hishead and threw it down on Richardson’s head five or six times according towitnesses.


Two other individuals were staying with Rose and Mrs.Richardson.  Shortly after the murder, they picked up Rose hitchhiking ona nearby street.  Rose told them that he had killed RobertRichardson.  The police arrested Rose at the apartment he shared with Mrs.Richardson.


Prior Incarceration History in the State of Florida:


Offense Date


Sentence Date


Case No.

Sentence Length


Agg. Assault w/weapon, No Intent to Kill




5 Years

Trial Summary:


10/26/82         Rose was indicted on the following:

                                   Count I:           First-DegreeMurder (Robert Richardson)

06/30/83         Rose was found guilty on Count I of the indictment.

07/05/86         The jury, by a 9 to 3 majority, recommended the death penalty.

07/08/83         Rose was sentenced as follows:

                                   Count I:          First-Degree Murder (Robert Richardson) – Death


Appeal Summary:


Florida Supreme Court – Direct Appeal

FSC #64,484

472 So. 2d 1155


11/07/83         Appeal filed.

05/16/85         FSC affirmed the conviction and sentence.

08/16/85         Rehearing denied.

10/02/85         Mandate issued.


U.S. Supreme Court – Petition for Writ of Certiorari


10/16/85         Petition filed.

10/22/85         Petition withdrawn.


Circuit Court – 3.850 Motion

CC #82-8683


10/07/87         Motion filed.

01/25/90         Motion denied.


Florida Supreme Court – 3.850 Motion Appeal

FSC #76,377

617 So. 2d 291


07/26/90         Appeal filed.

03/11/93         FSC affirmed the denial of the 3.850 Motion.

05/10/93         Rehearing denied.

05/10/93         Mandate issued.

U.S. Supreme Court – Petition for Writ of Certiorari

USSC #93-5695

510 U.S. 903


08/06/93         Petition filed.

10/04/93         Petition denied.


U.S. District Court, Middle District – Petition forWrit of Habeas Corpus

USDC #93-1169


07/19/93         Petition filed.

07/02/01         Amended Petition filed.

07/22/02         Petition stayed pending a decision in the King case.

02/06/03         Petition reopened.

09/10/03         Petition stayed.

09/06/05         Motion to reopen case and conduct Faretta Hearing.

11/08/05         Motion granted.

12/12/05         Faretta Hearing held.

09/01/06         Second Amended Petition filed.

03/19/10          Petition denied

04/19/10          Application for Certificate ofAppealability filed.

06/30/10          Application denied.



U.S. Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit– HabeasAppeal

USCA# 10-11848


04/20/10          Appeal filed.

08/18/10          Certificate of Appealability granted inpart and denied in part.

03/04/11          USCA affirmed denial of Habeas Petition.


Circuit Court – 3.850 Motion

CC #82-8683


12/24/96         Motion filed.

02/23/99         Motion denied.


Florida Supreme Court – 3.850 Motion Appeal

FSC #95,227

774 So. 2d 629


04/01/99         Appeal filed.

10/12/00         FSC affirmed the denial of the 3.850 Motion.

12/21/00         Rehearing denied.

01/22/01         Mandate issued.




08/26/87         Clemency hearing held (denied).




09/15/87         Death warrant signed by Governor Bob Martinez.

10/22/87         Stay of execution granted by the Pinellas County Circuit Court.


Factors Contributing to the Delay in Imposition ofSentence:


The Federal Habeas was pending for more than 9 years priorto being stayed; this petition was denied on 03/19/10. 


Case Information:


Rose filed his Direct Appeal in the Florida Supreme Court on11/07/83.  The issues addressed included that the trial court violatedRose’s right to due process by denying Rose’s motions to suppressevidence.  Rose also argued that the trial court mishandled mitigating andaggravating factors and that the death sentence wasdisproportionate.   The Florida Supreme Court did not find errorsthat warranted reversing the conviction or sentence and affirmed the convictionand sentence on 05/16/85. 


Rose filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari on 10/16/85with the U.S. Supreme Court.  The petition was withdrawn on 10/22/85.


Rose filed a 3.850 Motion with the Circuit Court on10/07/87.  The motion was denied on 01/25/90.


Rose filed a 3.850 Motion Appeal on 07/26/90 with theFlorida Supreme Court.  The issues addressed included that Rose receivedineffective assistance of counsel and that his right to be present during thetrial was violated.   Rose further argued that the trial court erredin dismissing his claims of ineffective counsel.  The Florida SupremeCourt affirmed the denial on 06/25/92.  The opinion was revised on03/11/93. 


Rose filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari on 08/06/93with the U.S. Supreme Court that was denied on 10/04/93.


Rose filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus with theU.S. District Court on 07/19/93.  Rose filed an Amended Petition for Writof Habeas Corpus in the U.S. District court on 07/02/01.  The petition wasstayed on 07/22/02 pending a decision in the King case[1].  The petition was reopened on02/06/03.  The petition was stayed on 09/10/03.  On 09/06/08, Rosefiled a motion to reopen the case and to conduct a Faretta Hearing, which wasgranted by the U.S. District Court on 11/08/05.  The Faretta Hearing washeld on 12/12/05.  On 09/01/06, Rose filed a Second Amended Petition forWrit of Habeas Corpus in the U.S. District Court.  This petition was deniedon 03/19/10. An application for the Certificate of Appealability was filed on04/19/10 and denied on 06/30/10.


On 04/20/10, Rose filed a Habeas appeal in the U.S. Court ofAppeals, 11th Circuit. The application for Certification ofAppealability was denied in part and granted in part on 08/18/10. The USCAaffirmed the decision of the lower court on 03/04/11.


Rose filed a 3.850 Motion with the Circuit Court on12/24/96.  The circuit court denied the motion on 02/23/99.


Rose filed a 3.850 Motion Appeal on 04/01/99 with theFlorida Supreme Court.  The issues addressed included that the statecommitted Brady[2] andGiglio[3]violations.  Rose further argued that he received ineffective assistanceof counsel, that the trial court erred in denying Rose’s Pro Se motion and thatthe use of electrocution as an execution method was unconstitutional.  TheFlorida Supreme Court affirmed the denial on 10/12/00. 



Institutional Adjustment:


DATE            DAYS             VIOLATION                                  LOCATION      

--------           ----                ----------------------------               -------------------

08/08/89         0                    UNARMED ASSAULT                   FSP

09/27/95         0                    FIGHTING                                     UNIONC. I.        




Report Date:   07/16/02         SQ

Approved:       09/24/02         WS

Updated:         04/06/11         EMJ



[1] Kingargued that relief should be granted due to the United States Supreme Courtruling in Ring v. Arizona, which determined that the jury, not the judge actingalone, should decide whether a defendant should be sentenced to death.

[2]An error committed when the State fails to disclose exculpatory evidence to thedefense.

[3]An error committed when the State knowingly presented or failed to correctfalse statements.