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 on for statistical or legal purposes.

BEASLEY, Curtis (W/M)

DC #   356054

DOB: 01/29/49   

Tenth Judicial Circuit, Polk County, Case #95-4842

Sentencing Judge: The Honorable Cecelia M. Moore 

Attorneys, Criminal Trial: Robert A. Norgard& Byron P. Hileman – Private   

Attorney, Direct Appeal: Robert A. Norgard– Private   

Attorney, Collateral Appeals: Dan Daly – Registry

Date of Offense:                                 08/24/95

Date of Sentence (Count I):               05/22/98

Date of Sentence (Counts II & III):   05/27/98 

Circumstances of Offense:

On 08/24/95, Jane O’Toole discovered the body of her mother,Carolyn Monfort, bludgeoned to death in the laundryroom of Monfort’s home.  The head of a hammer,wrapped in two dishtowels, was found broken from its handle near herbody.  Monfort sustained severe lacerations andbruising to her head and face, along with defensive wounds on her arms andhands. 

Monfort was last seen alive on08/21/95.  That morning, Monfort awoke anddressed for work as usual.  Curtis Beasley, an acquaintance of the family,was staying with Monfort while he was doing some workat an apartment complex owned by Neal O’Toole, Monfort’sson-in-law. Monfort managed that apartmentcomplex.  Beasley would spend the night at Monfort’splace, but would spend the majority of his free time at the home of SteveBenson, who he lived with prior to staying at the Monfortresidence.  Since Beasley’s van had broken down, and he had borrowedseveral hundred dollars from a friend, Dale Robinson, to have it repaired, Monfort would drive Beasley to and from work each day.

Later on 08/21/95, Jane O’Toole, the wife of Neal O’Toole,arranged to have Beasley help her and her husband move some furniture. While moving the furniture, Beasley asked O’Toole for money.  O’Tooleinformed Beasley that she has only a few dollars, but that her husband wouldpay him for the work that he was doing at the apartment complex.  O’Tooledrove Beasley back to the Monfort residence, where noone else was home.

Up until 7:00 p.m. that evening, several phone calls weremade from the Monfort residence to persons unknown toMonfort, but known to Beasley, including a call tothe United Kingdom.  One of the numbers called was written in Beasley’shandwriting on a newspaper on the coffee table. 

Evidence established that, after Monfortdropped Beasley off at work on 08/21/95, she went to a scheduled meeting at9:00 a.m.  Monfort then met with Mr. Rosario, apotential tenant, at 2:00 p.m. and again at 5:00 p.m.  Rosario paid Monfort $800 in one-hundred-dollar bills for the first andlast month’s rent.  He also paid her $100 for a set of bedroom furniturethat she was selling.  A receipt found in Monfort’scar established this transaction. Rosario was the last person to see Monfort alive before the discovery of her body three dayslater.

Between 8:30 and 10:00 p.m. that night, Beasley drove Monfort’s car to visit Dale Robinson.  Beasley toldRobinson the car he was driving belonged to a lady friend that he was workingfor and staying with.  During the visit, Beasley offered Robinson aone-hundred-dollar bill as partial payment for the money that Robinson loanedhim for van repairs.  Beasley then left Robinson’s house and did notreturn.

The next day, Beasley arrived at the bus station inMiami.  At this point, he contacted the Malcolms,friends he had not spoken to in years.  Beasley claimed to have lost hiswallet and had his traveler’s checks stolen.  Beasley stayed with Mrs.Malcolm for a few days, and then was allowed to stay at the home of Mrs. Bennis, Mr. Malcolm’s mother, while she was away for acouple of weeks.  During this time, the same phone calls that appeared on Monfort’s bill also appeared on Mrs. Bennis’bill, including the call to the United Kingdom.

When police conducted an investigation of the murder sceneat the Monfort residence, they noted that the onlyrooms that appeared to be disturbed were the laundry room, dining room andgarage.  All other rooms were impeccably clean because the housekeeper hadcleaned midmorning on 08/21/95.  Monfort’s carwas missing, as well as the hundreds of dollars given to her by Rosario. Several of Beasley’s personal items were located in the room that he had beenoccupying, including his business cards, cigarettes and toiletries. 

Family members were permitted to enter the home before thecompletion of the investigation to determine if anything was missing. Family members were asked to notify investigators when they entered the house,so that investigators could be present while they searched.  Beforedetectives arrived at the scene, Bud Stalnaker, Monfort’s son, found a pair of shoes and a wadded-up shirtunder the bed in the guest room.  No one touched the shirt and shoes untilthe detectives arrived.  When Detective Cash was gathering the evidencefrom under the bed, she noticed bloodstains on the shirt.  Subsequent DNAtests indicated that the blood belonged to Monfort,and the housekeeper identified the shirt as one she saw in Beasley’s room onthe morning of 08/21/95. 

A search for Beasley began in Central Florida.  Hecontinued to stay at the home of Mrs. Bennis until hegot into a physical altercation with Mr. Malcolm.  He was eventually locatedat a hotel in Alabama.  He had grown a beard and was using the name“William Benson.”  Beasley was charged with Robbery, Grand-Theft Auto, andthe First-Degree Murder of Carolyn Monfort.

Prior Incarceration History in the State of Florida:

Trial Summary:

02/01/96         The defendant was indicted on:

                                   Count I:           First-DegreeMurder

                                   Count II:         Robbery

                                   Count III:        Grand Theft Auto

02/18/98         The defendant was found guilty of all counts charged in the indictment.

02/26/98         Upon advisory sentencing, the jury, by a majority of 10 to 2, voted for thedeath penalty.

05/22/98         The defendant was sentenced as followed:

                                   Count I:           First-DegreeMurder - Death

05/27/98         The defendant was sentenced asfollowed:                           

Count II:        Robbery – 15 years

                                   Count III:        Grand Theft Auto – 15years

Appeal Summary:

Florida Supreme Court – Direct Appeal

FSC #93,310

774 So. 2d 649

06/29/98         Appeal filed.

10/26/00         FSC affirmed the convictions and sentence of death.

12/21/00         Rehearing denied.

01/22/01         Mandate issued.

State Circuit Court – 3.850 Motion

CC #95-4842

04/30/01         Motion filed.

09/20/04         Motion amended.

11/15/04         Motion amended.

01/09/06         Evidentiary Hearing held.

10/05/06         CC denied motion.

Florida Supreme Court – 3.850 Appeal

FSC# 06-2375

18 So.3d 473

12/01/06         Appeal filed.

07/09/09         Appeal denied.

09/23/09         Rehearing denied.

United States District Court, Middle District –Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

USDC# 09-01962

09/25/09          Petitionfiled.

03/30/10          Petitiondenied.

United StatesCourt of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit – Habeas Appeal

USCA# 10-11750

04/13/10          Appealfiled.

10/20/10          Certificateof Appealability(COA) denied.

United StatesSupreme Court – Petition for Writ of Certiorari

USSC# 10-8528

01/13/11          Petitionfiled.

03/28/11          Petitiondenied.

Factors Contributing to the Delay in the Imposition ofthe Sentence:

The 3.850 Motion was pending from 04/30/01 – 10/05/06.

Case Information:

On 06/29/98, Curtis Beasley filed a Direct Appeal in theFlorida Supreme Court.  In that appeal, he argued that the trial courterred in denying his motion of acquittal because the circumstantial evidence ofthe case was not inconsistent with Beasley’s reasonable hypothesis ofinnocence.  After much consideration, the Florida Supreme Court ruled thatthere was substantial evidence on record to support Beasley’s convictions. Beasley also contended that the trial court erred by not sequestering thevictim’s daughter and son, who were key witnesses in the case.  Beasleyargued that, without sequestration, one witness might change their testimony tomatch the evidence presented or previous testimony.  Beasley also arguedthat the presence of the victim’s family and their emotional reactionsprejudiced his case.  Additionally, Beasley argued the consideration andapplication of aggravating and mitigating circumstances.  The Florida SupremeCourt affirmed Beasley’s convictions and sentence of death on 10/26/00.

Beasley filed a 3.850 Motion in the State Circuit Court on04/30/01 and amended the motion on 09/20/04 and 11/15/04.  On 01/09/06, anEvidentiary Hearing was held.  On 10/05/06, the Circuit Court denied themotion.

Beasley filed a 3.850 Motion Appeal in the Florida SupremeCourt on 12/01/06, which was denied on 07/09/09. A Motion for Rehearing wasdenied on 09/23/09.

Beasley filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus in the UnitedStates District Court, Middle District, on 09/25/09, which was denied on03/30/10.

Beasley filed a Habeas Appeal in the United States Court ofAppeals on 04/13/10. On 10/20/10, the United States Court of Appeals deniedBeasley’s COA.

Beasley filed a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari in theUnited States Supreme Court on 01/13/11. That petition was denied on 03/28/11.

________________________________________________________________________

Report Date:   09/06/02          ew

Approved:       09/18/02          ws

Updated:         04/13/11          jjk