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.
HITCHCOCK, James (W/M)
DOB: 04/05/56
Ninth Judicial Circuit, Orange County, Case # 76-1942
Sentencing Judge, Trial I: TheHonorable Maurice M. Paul
Sentencing Judge, Resentencing I: The Honorable Gary L. Formet
Sentencing Judge, Resentencing II: The Honorable Gary L. Formet
Sentencing Judge, Resentencing III: The Honorable Richard F. Conrad
Attorney, Trial I: CharlesTabscott – Assistant Public Defender
Attorney, Resentencing: Patricia Cashman– Assistant Public Defender
Attorney, Second resentencing: Patricia Cashman – AssistantPublic Defender
Attorney, Third resentencing: Patricia Cashman– Assistant Public Defender
Attorneys,Direct Appeal I: Craig S. Barnard & RichardB. Greene – Assistant Public Defenders
Attorneys, Direct Appeal II: Steven Malone & Eric Cumfer – Assistant Public Defenders
Attorney,Direct Appeal III: Steven Malone – Assistant PublicDefender
Attorneys, Direct Appeal IV: StevenMalone & Gary Caldwell – Assistant Public Defenders
Attorneys,Direct AppealV: Richard Greene & GaryCaldwell – Assistant Public Defenders
Attorney, CollateralAppeals: Eric Pinkard& James Driscoll – CCRC-M
Date of Offense: 07/31/76
Date of Sentence: 02/11/77
Date of Resentencing: 02/24/88
Date of Second Resentencing: 08/30/93
Date of Third Resentencing: 10/10/96
Circumstances of Offense:
The defendant, James Hitchcock, was unemployed and moved inwith his brother, Richard, and Richard’s family in Orlando several weeks beforethe murder. Hitchcock watched television with Richard and his family onthe evening of the murder until approximately 11 p.m. At that time,Hitchcock left the house and spent the next several hours smoking marijuana anddrinking beer with some friends in Winter Garden.
Based on a statement that Hitchcock gave to the police afterhis arrest, Hitchcock came back to the house at approximately 2:30 a.m. Hitchcock entered the residence from a window in the dining room and proceededupstairs to the victim’s bedroom. He engaged in sexual intercourse withthe victim, Richard’s 13-year-old stepdaughter. Afterwards, the victimtold Hitchcock that she was injured and that she was going to tell her motherwhat happened. When Hitchcock stopped the victim from leaving thebedroom, the victim began to yell. Hitchcock choked the victim to preventher from yelling and took her outside. The victim continued to makenoise, so Hitchcock beat and choked the victim until she was silent and thenleft her body in some bushes near the house. Hitchcock returned to thehouse after the crime and showered before he went to bed.
Hitchcock withdrew his prior statement at trial. Hitchcock now claimed that the victim gave him entry into the house andwillingly allowed him into her room to engage in consensual intercourse. Hitchcock said that his brother, Richard, entered the bedroom shortly after thesexual act, took the victim outside, and proceeded to choke her. Hitchcock claimed that the victim was deceased before he successfully pulledRichard off of the victim. Richard had reportedly told Hitchcock that hehad no intention of actually killing his stepdaughter. Hitchcock toldRichard that he would cover for him. Hitchcock said that he gave hisprior statement for the sole purpose of protecting Richard.
Additional Information:
On 05/03/05, while the3.850 Appeal and Habeas Petition were pending, the Florida Supreme Courtrelinquished jurisdiction relinquished to the Circuit Court for an EvidentiaryHearing on guilt phase issues.
Trial Summary:
08/06/76 Defendant indicted with thefollowing:
Count I: First-Degree Murder
01/26/77 Defendant found guilty of First-Degree Murder
02/04/77 The jury voted for a sentence of death by amajority
02/11/77 Defendant was sentenced as follows:
Count I: First-Degree Murder – Death
04/22/87 United States Supreme Courtgranted Certiorari and remanded the case to the trial court for resentencing
First Resentencing:
02/20/88 Jury recommended death by avote of 7-5
02/24/88 Defendant was resentenced asfollows:
Count I: First-Degree Murder – Death
01/28/93 Florida Supreme Court remandedcase to trial court for resentencing
Second Resentencing:
08/27/93 Jury recommended death by avote of 12-0
08/30/93 Defendant was resentenced asfollows:
Count I: First-Degree Murder – Death
03/21/96 Florida Supreme Court remandedcase to trial court for resentencing
Third Resentencing:
09/11/96 Jury recommended death by avote of 10-2
10/10/96 Defendant was resentenced asfollows:
Count I: First-DegreeMurder – Death
Appeal Summary:
Florida Supreme Court - Direct Appeal
FSC#51,108
413 So. 2d 741
02/17/77 Appeal filed.
02/25/82 FSC affirmed the convictionand sentence of death.
05/27/82 Rehearing denied.
United States Supreme Court - Petition for Writ ofCertiorari
USSC#82-5305
459 U.S. 960
08/25/82 Petition filed.
10/18/82 Petition denied.
Circuit Court - 3.850 Motion
CC#76-1942
05/03/83 Motion filed.
05/10/83 Motion denied.
Florida Supreme Court - 3.850 Appeal
FSC#63,667
432 So. 2d 42
05/10/83 Appeal filed.
05/17/83 FSC affirmed the circuitcourt’s denial of 3.850 Motion.
United States District Court (Middle District) -Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
USDC#83-357
05/13/83 Petition filed.
09/22/83 Petition dismissed.
United States Court of Appeals for the 11thCircuit - Habeas Appeal
USCA#83-3578
476 U.S. 1168
10/03/83 Appeal filed.
10/18/84 Appeal denied.
01/18/85 USCA granted the rehearing enbanc.
08/28/85 USCA affirmed the Districtcourt’s denial of the Petition for Habeas Corpus.
11/19/85 Rehearing denied.
**Due to the age of thiscase, the 11th Circuit has no record of the Habeas Appeal and, thus,these dates could not be confirmed.
United States Supreme Court - Petition for Writ ofCertiorari
USSC#85,6756
481 U.S. 393
04/18/86 Petition filed.
04/22/87 Petition granted and remandedto the District court.
United States District Court (Middle District) -Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (on remand)
USDC#83-357
11/25/87 USDC vacated the Habeas denialand remanded the case to the circuit court for resentencing.
Florida Supreme Court - Direct Appeal (Resentencing)
FSC# 72,200
578 So. 2d 685
03/23/88 Appeal filed.
12/20/90 Sentence affirmed.
05/16/91 Rehearing denied.
06/17/91 Mandate issued.
United States Supreme Court - Petition for Writ ofCertiorari
USSC#91-5450
502 U.S. 912
08/12/91 Petition filed.
10/15/91 Petition denied.
06/29/92 USSC granted the rehearing andvacated the denial of the Certiorari.
USSC granted certiorari and remanded the case to the FSC for further
consideration in light of Espinosa v. Florida.
**Espinosa v. Florida –The USSC decision that stated Florida’s Heinous, Atrocious, and
Cruel (HAC)aggravator was vague andinvalid
Florida Supreme Court - Direct Appeal (on remand)
FSC#72,200
614 So. 2d 483
01/28/93 FSC remanded case to circuitcourt for resentencing.
03/22/93 Rehearing denied.
04/21/93 Mandate issued.
Florida Supreme Court - Direct Appeal (Secondresentencing)
FSC#82,350
673 So. 2d 589
09/13/93 Appeal filed.
03/21/96 FSC remanded case to circuitcourt for resentencing.
Florida Supreme Court - Direct Appeal (Thirdresentencing)
FSC#92,717
755 So. 2d 638
04/01/98 Appeal filed.
03/23/00 FSC affirmed sentence ofdeath.
05/03/00 Rehearing denied.
07/21/00 Mandate issued.
United States Supreme Court - Petition for Writ ofCertiorari
USSC#00-6447
531 U.S. 1040
09/29/00 Petition filed.
12/04/00 Petition denied.
Circuit Court - 3.850 Motion
CC#76-1942
02/07/01 Motion filed.
11/30/01 Motion denied.
Circuit Court – 3.853 Motion(DNA)
CC#76-1942
12/29/01 Motion filed.
06/25/02 Motion denied.
Florida Supreme Court – 3.853 Motion Appeal
FSC#02-2037
866So.2d 23
08/07/02 Appeal filed.
01/15/04 Denial of Motion affirmed.
02/16/04 Mandate issued.
Florida Supreme Court – 3.850 Motion Appeal
FSC#03-2203
991 So. 2d 337
12/12/03 Appeal filed.
05/03/05 Jurisdiction relinquished for an Evidentiary Hearing on guilt phase issues.
03/07/06 Evidentiary Hearing held.
05/08/06 CC denied motion.
05/22/08 Appeal denied.
06/05/08 Motion for rehearing.
10/03/08 Mandate issued.
Florida Supreme Court – Petition for Writ of HabeasCorpus
FSC# 04-1286
991 So. 2d 337
06/28/04 Petition filed.
05/03/05 Jurisdiction relinquished for an Evidentiary Hearing on guilt phase issues.
03/07/06 Evidentiary Hearing held.
05/08/06 CC denied motion.
05/22/08 Appeal denied.
06/05/08 Motion for rehearing.
10/03/08 Mandate issued.
United StatesDistrict Court, Middle District – Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
USDC#08-01719
10/06/08 Petition filed.
02/03/09 Petition dismissed without prejudice.
Death Warrant Information:
04/21/83 Death Warrant signed byGovernor Bob Graham.
05/17/83 Stay granted by the UnitedStates District Court.
09/22/83 Stay lifted.
Clemency Hearing:
02/22/82 Hearing held (denied).
Factors Contributing to the Delay in Imposition ofSentence:
The initial Direct Appealtook five years for a decision to be rendered. In addition to the defendantbeing resentenced three times, the large number of appeals has contributed tothe delay of Hitchcock’s execution. During Hitchcock’s 3.850 MotionAppeal and Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the FSC relinquishedjurisdiction from 05/03/05 – 05/08/06 to hold an Evidentiary Hearing on guiltphase issues.
Case Information:
A Direct Appeal was filedwith the Florida Supreme Court (FSC) on 02/17/77. Issues that were raisedincluded whether there was sufficient evidence to convict Hitchcock ofFirst-Degree Murder and whether the trial judge improperly assessed theaggravating and mitigating factors. The FSC ruled that all of the issuesraised were either without merit or harmless and affirmed the conviction andsentence of Death on 02/25/82.
A Petition for the Writof Certiorari was filed with the United States Supreme Court (USSC) on 08/25/82and denied on 10/18/82.
A 3.850 Motion was filedwith the circuit court on 05/03/83 and denied on 05/10/83.
A 3.850 Appeal was filedwith the FSC on 05/10/83. Issues that were raised included whether thedeath sentence violated Hitchcock's Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendmentrights because the law prevented his trial counsel from presenting nonstatutory mitigating evidence at his sentencinghearing. The FSC found all claims either without merit or harmless andaffirmed the circuit court’s denial of the 3.850 Motion on 05/17/83.
A Petition for HabeasCorpus was filed with the United States District Court (Middle) on 05/13/83 andwas dismissed on 09/22/83.
A Habeas Appeal was filedwith the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals on 10/03/83. The 11thCircuit Court of Appeals affirmed the USDC’s denial of the Habeas Petition on10/18/84. The rehearing was granted en banc on 01/18/85. Afterrehearing the case, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals again affirmedthe USDC’s denial of the Habeas Petition on 08/28/85.
A Petition for the Writof Certiorari was filed with the USSC on 04/18/86. The USSC found that thetrial judge had barred the consideration of nonstatutorymitigating factors and therefore the defendant’s Death sentence wasinvalid. On 04/22/87, the USSC granted Certiorari and remanded the caseto the USDC.
The USDC vacated theHabeas denial on 11/25/87 and remanded the case to the trial court to beresentenced within 60 days.
Hitchcock was resentencedon 02/24/88.
A second Direct Appealwas filed with the FSC on 03/23/88. Issues raised on appeal includedwhether the trial court improperly refused to grant his challenges for cause tothree prospective jurors and whether the trial court prevented Hitchcock frompresenting additional mitigating evidence. The sentence was affirmed bythe FSC on 12/20/90.
A Petition for the Writof Certiorari was filed with the USSC on 08/12/91 and denied on 10/15/91. A rehearing was granted on 06/29/92 and the USSC granted Certiorari by vacatingtheir 10/15/91 order denying Certiorari and remanded the case to the FSC forfurther consideration based on Espinosa v. Florida.
On 01/28/93, the FSCremanded the case to the trial court for a new sentencing hearing to take placewithin 90 days.
A third Direct Appeal wasfiled with the FSC on 09/13/93. The case was remanded to the trial courton 03/21/96 because on appeal, Hitchcock argued that evidence was erroneouslypresented portraying him as a pedophile that deprived Hitchcock of a fairsentencing hearing.
A fourth Direct Appealwas filed with the FSC on 04/01/98. Issues that were raised includedwhether the trial court erred in permitting the state to put into evidence areport concerning the results of a psychological test. All of the claimswere found to be either harmless or without merit and the FSC affirmed thesentence of Death on 03/23/00.
A Petition for the Writof Certiorari was filed with the USSC on 09/29/00 and denied on 12/04/00.
A 3.850 Motion was filedwith the circuit court on 02/07/01 and amended on 11/30/01. The circuitcourt denied the Motion on 10/27/03.
A 3.853 Motion was filedwith the circuit court on 12/29/01 and denied on 06/25/02.
A 3.853 Motion Appeal wasfiled with the Florida Supreme Court on 08/07/02 and the denial of the 3.853Motion was affirmed on 01/15/04.
A 3.850 Motion Appeal wasfiled with the Florida Supreme Court on 12/12/03 and is pending before thecourt. On 05/03/05, the Florida Supreme Court relinquished jurisdictionrelinquished to the Circuit Court for an Evidentiary Hearing on guilt phaseissues. On 03/07/06, an Evidentiary Hearing was held, and on 05/08/06,the Circuit Court denied the motion. On 05/22/08 the Florida SupremeCourt denied the appeal.
A Petition for Writ ofHabeas Corpus was filed with the Florida Supreme Court on 06/28/04 and ispending before the court. On 05/03/05, the Florida Supreme Courtrelinquished jurisdiction relinquished to the Circuit Court for an EvidentiaryHearing on guilt phase issues. On 03/07/06, an Evidentiary Hearing was held,and on 05/08/06, the Circuit Court denied the motion. On 05/22/08 the FloridaSupreme Court denied the appeal.
On 10/06/08, Hitchcockfiled a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus in the United States District Court.This petition was dismissed without prejudice on 02/03/09.
Institutional Adjustment:
THEFOLLOWING ENTRIES REFLECT DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS AGAINST THE INMATE
FORVIOLATION OF THE RULE CITED AND INDICATE THE GAIN TIME DAYS LOST.
DATE DAYS VIOLATION LOCATION
03/25/78 15 FAIL.PERSONAL HYG. FLORIDA STATE PRISON
03/12/79 0 DEST. OF ST. PROP. FLORIDA STATE PRISON
01/10/80 0 DISOBEYINGORDER FLORIDA STATE PRISON
03/13/80 60 ESCAPE ORATTEMPT FLORIDA STATE PRISON
02/12/84 30 DISORDERLY CONDUCT NEW RIVER "O" UNIT
11/23/86 0 FAIL.HOUSING HYG. FLORIDA STATE PRISON
04/07/88 60 UNARMEDASSAULT FLORIDA STATE PRISON
04/12/93 0 POSS OFCONTRABAND FLORIDA STATE PRISON
Report Date: 05/14/02 cc
Approved: 07/10/02 ws
Updated: 04/21/09 klh