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
SeibertMichael 10566911th Circuit PDCase Summary

Last Action

DateCourtCase NumberLast Action
8/26/2008FSC08-1615Habeas Petition filed
10/7/2008FSC08-1615Response brief filed
1/5/2009FSC08-1615Reply brief filed
10/7/2009FSC08-1615Oral Arguments held
7/8/2010FSC08-1615Petition denied
7/23/2010FSC08-1615Motion for Rehearing filed
4/14/2011FSC08-1615Motion denied
4/22/2008FSC08-7083.851 appeal filed
8/26/2008FSC08-708Initial brief filed
10/4/2008FSC08-708Answer brief filed
12/24/2008FSC08-708Response brief filed
1/5/2009FSC08-708Reply brief filed
1/26/2009FSC08-708State's Reply filed
10/7/2009FSC08-708Oral Arguments held
7/8/2010FSC08-708FSC affirmed denial of 3.851 Motion
7/23/2010FSC08-708Motion for Rehearing filed
4/14/2011FSC08-708Motion denied

Current Attorney


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. 


SEIBERT, Michael (W/M)

DC#     105669

DOB:  01/12/68


Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Miami-Dade County Case # 98-8943

Sentencing Judge: The Honorable Stanford Blake

Attorney, Trial: Richard Houlihan & Kenneth White –Assistant Public Defenders

Attorney, Direct Appeal: Scott W. Sakin – Special AssistantPublic Defender

Attorney, Collateral Appeals: Leor Veleanu & RoseanneEckert – CCRC-S


Date of Offense: 03/17/98

Date of Sentence: 03/24/03


Circumstances of Offense:


On 03/17/98, two officers responded to an attempted suicidecall at Michael Seibert’s apartment.  The officers knocked on the door. Seibert eventually answered and said he was okay, told them to leave, andthen shut the door.  The officers demanded to come inside and forced theirway through the door under the impression there was an emergency situationwhere someone could be hurt.  The officers checked Seibert for weapons andinjury.  While looking over Seibert’s apartment, one of the officersnoticed a severed foot in the bath tub and yelled to the other officer therehad been a homicide.  Seibert took off running but was tackled andapprehended in the apartment hallway.   Seibert was then taken intocustody.  While being booked, the officer noted that Seibert’s behaviorwas unusual and that he acted as though he was “out of it”.  Duringquestioning, Seibert said he was high on heroin and cocaine.


The body parts found in Seibert’s bath tub belonged toKarolay Adrianza.  Adrianza had gone out the previous evening to the beachwith her boyfriend and never returned home.  Seibert had a roommate namedWilliam “Ace” Green who did not pay rent and made money by selling drugs. Green testified that on March 17, 1998, he saw Seibert with Karolay Adrianzaand her boyfriend, Danny Navarres, in their apartment.   The threeingested a large quantity of cocaine.  Seibert sent Green and Navarres tothe store to buy cigarettes and beer.  When they returned, Navarres didnot enter the apartment and said he had to go buy something and would be backlater. 


When Green arrived back at the apartment alone, Adrianzaasked for her boyfriend and made several phone calls to see where he was. After about 30 minutes, Seibert asked Green to leave and keep an eye out forNavarres stating that he wanted to be alone with Adrianza.  Green hadnoticed that Seibert had been flirting with Adrianza.  Green left theapartment and went to a laundromat to talk to a friend who worked there. After a while, Green wanted back into the apartment.  He did nothave a key so he called several times, but Seibert would not answer. Green then knocked on the door and Seibert said to come back later makingcomments that he only needed a little bit longer before he would be in herpants.  Later on, when Green knocked on the door again, Seibert asked himto go buy some cigarettes.  Green refused and said he wanted inside. An argument occurred and, at one point, Seibert stated he was going to killhimself.  Green then called the police and reported a suicide attempt.


Adrianza’s body was in the bath tub clothed in a shirt andunderwear.  Most of the soft tissue below her waist had been removed(approximately 40 to 50 pounds) which included part of her abdominal wall, thelarge bowel and part of the small bowel, which had been flushed down thetoilet.  Adrianza’s left hand, left foot and left ankle and been separatedfrom the body.  Examiners estimated that the cutting and flushing of herbody that Seibert did would have taken about an hour.  Adrianza died fromstrangulation. There was also evidence of Seibert’s semen inside Adrianza’sbody.  It could not be determined if Seibert had sex with Adrianza beforeor after her death.


 Prior Incarceration History in the State ofFlorida:






Case No.

Prison Sentence


Kidnap; Comm. or Fac. Felony




15Y 0M 0D


Grand Theft Motor Vehicle




5Y 0M 0D


Burg Unoccstruc/CV or Att.




15Y 0M 0D


1st DG Mrd/Premed. Or Attempted




30Y 0M 0D


Kinap; Comm. or Fac. Felony




30Y 0M 0D


Grand Theft Motor




5Y 0M 0D



Trial Summary:


04/01/98         Indicted as follows:

                                   Count I:          First-Degree Murder

11/21/02         Jury returned guilty verdicts on the sole count of the indictment.

02/11/03         Jury recommended death by a vote of 9-3.

03/24/03         Sentenced as follows:

                                   Count I:          First-Degree Murder – Death

Appeal Summary:


Florida Supreme Court – Direct Appeal

FSC# 03-800

923 So. 2d 460


04/28/03         Appeal filed.

02/16/06         FSC affirmed conviction and sentence.

05/04/06         Rehearing denied.

05/22/06         Mandate issued.


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

USSC# 06-5049

127 S. Ct. 198


06/28/06         Petition filed.

10/02/06         USSC denied petition.


State Circuit Court – 3.850 Motion

CC# 98-8943


09/11/07         Motion filed.

02/28/08         Motion denied.

03/11/08         Motion for Rehearing filed.

03/17/08         Motion for Rehearing denied.


Florida Supreme Court – 3.851 Appeal

FSC# 08-708


04/22/08         Appealfiled.

07/08/10          FSC affirmed the denial of postconvictionmotion.

07/23/10          Motion for rehearing filed.

04/11/11          Motion denied.


Florida Supreme Court – Habeas Petition

FSC# 08-1615


08/26/08         Petitionfiled.

07/08/10          Petition denied.

07/23/10          Motion for rehearing filed.

04/11/11          Motion denied.


Case Information:


On 04/28/03, Siebert filed a direct appeal to the FloridaSupreme Court.  Seibert claimed that error occurred in the court denyinghis motions to suppress evidence and statements from the police entering hisapartment non-consensually without a warrant, thus violating Siebert’sconstitutional rights.  He also contended that error occurred in the trialcourt refusing his motion for mistrial based on irrelevant and highlyprejudicial evidence presented by the state, which violated his FourteenthAmendment right.  In his appeal, Siebert also argued that, under thecircumstances of his case, the death sentence is disproportionate and violatesthe Constitution.  Siebert argued that the jury did not have a fairconsideration in the sentencing recommendation due to the prosecutor’s improperand prejudicial reference to irrelevant criminal activity as a non-statutoryaggravating circumstance. His final arguments referred to the Florida Capitalsentencing scheme as being unconstitutional for several reasons.  TheFlorida Supreme Court affirmed Seibert’s conviction and sentence on 02/16/06.


On 06/28/06, Seibert filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorariin the United States Supreme Court that was denied on 10/02/06.


On 09/11/07, Seibert filed a 3.850 Motion forPost-Conviction Relief in the State Circuit Court.  This motion was deniedon 02/28/08.  On 03/11/08, Seibert filed a Motion for Rehearing which wasdenied on 03/17/08.


On 04/22/08, Seibert filed a 3.851 Appeal in the FloridaSupreme Court.  The denial of the postconviction motion was affirmed on07/08/10. A motion for rehearing was filed on 07/23/10, and it was denied on04/11/11.


On 08/26/08, Seibert filed a Habeas Petition in the FloridaSupreme Court.  This petition was denied on 07/08/10. A motion for rehearingwas filed on 07/23/10, and it was denied on 04/11/11.




Report Date:   06/09/06         DDK

Approved:       06/12/06         JFL

Updated:         04/14/11         EMJ