The Commission on Capital Cases updates thisinformation regularly. This information, however, is subject to change and maynot reflect the latest status of an inmate’s case and should not be relied uponfor statistical or legal purposes.
MCDONALD, Meryl Stanley (B/M)
DC# 180399
DOB: 08/15/46
Sixth Judicial Circuit, Pinellas County, Case# 94-02958
Sentencing Judge: The Honorable Susan F. Schaeffer
Attorneys, Trial: Michael Schwartzberg & RichardN. Watts – Private
Attorney, Direct Appeal: Richard N. Watts – Private
Attorneys, Collateral Appeals: Peter J. Cannon &Daphney E. Gaylord – CCRC-M
Date of Offense: 01/25/94
Date of Sentence: 11/16/95
Circumstances of the Offense:
Denise Davidson and her fiancé, Leonardo Cisnero, hiredRobert Gordon and Meryl McDonald, to kill Ms. Davidson’s estranged husband, Dr.Louis Davidson.
Early on the morning of 01/25/94, McDonald and Gordon waitedin the parking lot of the apartment complex where Dr. Davidson lived. Thetwo were driven by Susan Shore. Gordon met with Dr. Davidson and the two walkedto Davidson’s apartment. Dr. Davidson’s body was discovered later thatday by his fiancée. His body was blindfolded, bound, gagged, andhog-tied, lying face down in a bathtub full of bloody water. Theapartment had been ransacked, and Davidson’s watch, camera, and money clip weremissing, although $19,300 in cash and some credit cards remained.
The medical examiner testified that Davidson had bruises onhis face and shoulders, three broken ribs, and multiple lacerations on the backof his scalp, caused by a blunt object. The cause of Davidson’s death wasdrowning.
Money transfers from Denise Davidson to McDonald, as well asphone records and physical evidence recovered from the hotel where Gordon andMcDonald were staying during the time of the murder, implicated McDonald in themurder scheme.
Codefendant Information:
Robert Roy Gordon (DC# 123911)
For his involvement in the murder, Gordon was tried withMcDonald and was found guilty of first-degree murder. Gordon was alsosentenced to death (CC# 94-2958).
Denise Ann Davidson (DC# 153691)
Davidson was found guilty of first-degree murder in aseparate trial. She was sentenced to life in prison without the possibilityof parole for 25 years (CC# 94-2958).
Susan Shore
Shore agreed to testify for the State, and as a result, hercharges were reduced to Accessory After the Fact. She was sentenced toprobation.
Leonardo Cisneros
Cisneros remains a fugitive.
Trial Summary:
04/27/94 Indicted as follows:
Count I: First-Degree Murder
11/22/94 Defendant pled not guilty
06/15/95 Jury returned guilty verdicts on all counts of the indictment
06/16/95 Jury recommended death by a vote of 9-3
11/16/95 Sentenced as follows:
Count I: First-Degree Murder – Death
Appeal Summary:
Florida State Supreme Court – Direct Appeal
FSC# 87,059
743 So. 2d 501
12/22/95 Appeal filed
07/01/99 FSC affirmed the conviction and sentence
09/17/99 Rehearing denied
10/18/99 Mandate issued
State Circuit Court – 3.850 Motion
CC# 94-02958
12/15/00 Motion filed
02/10/03 Motion denied
Florida Supreme Court – 3.850 Appeal
FSC# 03-648
952 So.2d 484
03/31/03 Appeal filed
11/02/06 The FSC affirmed the lower court’s denial of McDonald’s 3.850 Motion
03/12/07 Motion for Rehearing denied
03/28/07 Mandate issued
Florida Supreme Court – Petition for Writ HabeasCorpus
FSC# 04-708
952 So.2d 484
04/30/04 Petition filed
11/02/06 Petition denied
03/12/07 Motion for Rehearing denied
03/28/07 Mandate issued
United States District Court, Middle District –Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
USDC# 07-00564
(Pending)
04/02/07 Petition filed
Florida Supreme Court – Petition for Writ HabeasCorpus
FSC# 08-61
991So.2d 387
01/11/08 Petition filed
08/26/08 Petition denied
Factors Contributing to the Delay in the Imposition ofthe Sentence:
The Direct Appeal was pending for four years in the FloridaSupreme Court.
Case Information:
McDonald filed a Direct Appeal to the Florida Supreme Courton 12/22/95. On 04/14/97, the Florida Supreme Court granted a pro se motion todismiss Richard Sanders as McDonald’s attorney. On 05/27/97, the initialappellant’s brief was struck and on 06/18/97 Richard N. Watts became McDonald’sattorney. McDonald raised eight issues on appeal. Many of these issues wereparallel to the issues raised by Gordon on his appeal, specifically denyingGordon’s motion to strike the venire; denying motion for judgment of acquittalat the close of evidence; denying request for a separate penalty phase fromthat of his co-defendant and a new penalty phase jury; disproportionalsentencing; and improper finding of the cold, calculated, and premeditated andheinous, atrocious, or cruel aggravating factors. Due to the fact that theevidence against McDonald was synonymous to the evidence against Gordon, theFlorida Supreme Court rejected them on the same basis. The Florida SupremeCourt found two of the issues not cognizant on appeal and no error on theremaining issues; therefore, the Court affirmed McDonald’s conviction andsentence on 07/01/99. The rehearing was denied on 09/17/99 and the mandate wasissued on 10/18/99.
McDonald filed a 3.850 Motion to the Circuit Court on12/15/00. The motion was denied on 02/10/04.
McDonald then filed a 3.850 Appeal to the Florida SupremeCourt on 03/31/03. McDonald’s CCRC counsel raised several claims onappeal, which were not adequately presented because McDonald failed to raisethem when he was allowed to represent himself during the post-convictionproceedings. The claims were: (1) the Faretta inquiry, (2) Bradyand Giglio claims, and (3) ineffective assistance of counsel. The Courtdenied all claims and concluded that, since the lower court properly allowedMcDonald to represent himself, these claims may not be raised for the firsttime on appeal. On 11/02/06, the Court affirmed the lower court’s denialof McDonald’s 3.850 Motion. The Motion for Rehearing was denied on03/12/07 and the mandate was issued on 03/28/07.
McDonald also filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus tothe Florida Supreme Court on 04/30/04. McDonald claimed that he isentitled to relief because: (1) the United States Supreme Court decidedRing, and (2) the trial court conducted an inadequate inquiry underFaretta. The Court decided that, since Ring was decided after McDonald’sconvictions became final, the Ring claim is inapplicable to this case. The claim raises no new issues and is therefore without merit. For theFaretta inquiry, the Court stated that habeas petitions cannot be used as ameans to seek a second appeal or to litigate issues that could have been orwere raised in a post-conviction appeal. Thus, the Faretta claim wasprocedurally barred. On 11/02/06, the Court denied McDonald’s Petitionfor Writ of Habeas Corpus. The Motion for Rehearing was denied on03/12/07 and the mandate was issued on 03/28/07.
On 04/02/07, McDonald filed a Petition for Writ of HabeasCorpus to the United States District Court, Middle District. The case iscurrently pending.
McDonald filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus to theFlorida Supreme Court on 01/11/08, which was denied on 08/26/08.
Institutional Adjustment:
DATE DAYS VIOLATION LOCATION
-------- ---- ---------------------------- -------------------
04/27/00 0 MAIL VIOLATIONS UNION C. I.
________________________________________________________________________
Report Date: 01/28/02 NMP
Approved: 02/06/02 WS
Updated: 11/25/08 AEH