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.
PHILMORE, Lenard James (B/M)
DC# 314648
DOB: 10/25/76
Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Martin County, Case# 97-1672
Sentencing Judge, Trial: The Honorable Cynthia Angelos
Attorneys, Trial: Sherwood Bauer & Thomas Garland– Assistant Public Defenders
Attorney, Direct Appeal: Patrick C. Rastatter –Assistant Public Defender
Attorneys, Collateral Appeals: Richard E. Kiley &James V. Viggiano– CCRC-M
Date of Offense: 11/14/97
Date of Sentence: 07/21/00
Circumstances of Offense:
Lenard Philmore was convicted in the 11/14/97, murder ofKazue Perron and sentenced to death.
Philmore and Anthony Spann, the codefendant, wanted to go toNew York and decided to rob a store to obtain the money required to getthere. Their first attempt to rob a pawnshop failed and, subsequently,they decided to rob a bank. On 11/13/97, after picking up theirgirlfriends, Spann told Philmore that in order to rob a bank they needed tosteal a car to use as a getaway vehicle. Spann also told Philmore theyhad to kill the driver.
On 11/14/97, Philmore and Spann started to search for a carto steal at the Palm Beach Mall. Using Spann’s Subaru, they followed awoman in her vehicle to another mall, but failed to steal her car. Then,they noticed Perron driving her Lexus in a nearby neighborhood and began tofollow her.
Philmore and Spann followed Perron until she pulled into adriveway. Spann then told Philmore to “get her.” Spann walked up toPerron, who was still in her car, and asked if he could use her phone, but shetold him she did not live in the house. Philmore then took out his gunand ordered her to move over to the passenger side of the car. Philmoredrove Perron’s Lexus while Spann followed in his Subaru. During thedrive, Perron was crying and told Philmore she was scared.
Spann flashed his lights at Philmore indicating that hewanted to pull over. Spann then told Philmore to take Perron to thebank. Philmore asked her if she had any money in her account. Shetold him no but offered to give him the $40 she had with her. Philmoretook off her rings and stored them in the armrest of the Lexus. Perronasked if Philmore or Spann was going to kill her, and he replied that no onewas going to kill her.
After they continued to drive for a while, Spann flashed hislights again indicating that they should turn down a street. They werethen in western Martin County. Once they stopped, Philmore told Perron toget out of the car and to start to walk toward some high vegetation in thearea. Perron began to resist and Philmore shot her once in the head.Philmore put the body in the vegetation.
Philmore and Spann, both still in the separate cars, thendrove to Indiantown and stopped at a store where Spann pointed out a bank forthem to rob. Philmore left the Lexus a distance from the bank and rodewith Spann. While Spann was waiting in the car, Philmore went into thebank, grabbed $1,100 from the teller, and returned to the Subaru. Theythen drove to the Lexus, hid the Subaru and drove away. Philmorediscarded his tank top out of the car window, which had Perron’s blood onit.
They drove back to Palm Beach County to pick up theirgirlfriends and eat. Philmore then wanted to go to a house because he hadleft his shoes there. Upon driving to the house, they spotted anundercover police vehicle near the house. The officer in the vehiclerecognized Spann because of an outstanding warrant he had. Spann, withPhilmore and the two girls in the car, sped away and the officer followed,which began a high-speed chase on Interstate 95.
The chase led them back to Martin County, where a tire blewout on the Lexus. All four of them hid in a nearby orange grove, but werediscovered by the manager of the grove. The manager told authoritieswhere to find them and they were arrested.
During the Police interviews Philmore confessed to therobbery, stealing the car and shooting Perron. On 11/21/97, Philmore tookthe police to the spot they had left Perron’s body.
Trial Summary:
11/14/97 Defendant was arrested
12/16/97 Indicted as follows:
Count I: First-Degree Murder (Perron)
Count II: Conspiracy to CommitRobbery with a Deadly
Weapon
Count III: Carjacking with a DeadlyWeapon
Count IV: Kidnapping
Count V: Robbery with a DeadlyWeapon
Count VI: Grand Theft
02/24/98 Defendant entered a written plea of not guilty
01/20/00 Jury returned guilty verdicts on all counts of the indictment
01/28/00 Jury recommended death by a vote of 12-0
07/21/00 Sentenced as follows:
Count I: First-Degree Murder (Perron) – Death
CountII: Conspiracy to CommitRobbery with a Deadly Weapon – 15years
Count III: Carjacking with a DeadlyWeapon – Life
Count IV: Kidnapping – Life
Count V: Robbery with a DeadlyWeapon – Life
Count VI: Grand Theft – 5 years
Codefendant Information:
Anthony Spann (DC# 347463)
Spann was indicted by the same grand jury with the samecharges as Philmore, but they were tried separately. Spann received adeath sentence and is currently on death row appealing his conviction andsentence (CC# 97-3500).
Prior Incarceration History in the State of Florida:
| Offense Date | Offense | Sentence Date | County | Case No. | Prison Sentence |
| 12/09/93 | Robbery W/Firearm or Deadly Weapon | 06/29/94 | Palm Beach | 9313147 | 4Y 0M 0D |
Appeal Summary:
Florida Supreme Court – Direct Appeal
FSC# 00-1706
820 So. 2d 919
08/21/00 Appeal filed
05/30/02 Conviction and sentence affirmed
06/21/02 Mandate issued
United States Supreme Court – Petition for Writ ofCertiorari
USSC# 02-5109
123 S. Ct. 179
07/05/02 Petition filed
10/07/02 Petition denied
State Circuit Court – 3.850 Motion
CC# 97-1672CFA
09/16/03 Motion filed
05/13/04 Motion denied
Florida Supreme Court – 3.850 Appeal
FSC# 04-1036
937 So.2d 578
06/14/04 Appeal filed
06/15/06 FSC affirmed the trial court’s denial of Philmore’s 3.850 Motion
08/30/06 Motion for rehearing denied
09/15/06 Mandate issued
Florida Supreme Court – Petition for Writ of HabeasCorpus
FSC# 05-250
937 So.2d 578
02/09/05 Petition filed
06/15/06 Petition denied
09/15/06 Mandate issued
United States District Court, Southern District –Habeas Petition
USDC# 06-14249
09/22/06 Petition filed
07/17/07 Petition denied
07/30/07 Motion for Certificate of Appealability filed
07/31/07 Appealability granted
United States Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit – HabeasPetition Appeal
USCA# 07-13637P
575 F.3d 1251
08/14/07 Appeal filed
07/23/09 USCA affirmed the denial of the Petition
United States Supreme Court – Petition for Writ ofCertiorari
USSC# 09-806
12/10/09 Petition filed
03/22/10 Petition denied
Case Information:
On 08/21/00, Philmore filed his Direct Appeal to the FloridaSupreme Court. Philmore contended that the trial court erred in notsuppressing his statements made to the officers while being questioned aboutthe circumstances. He also claimed that the trial court erred in not findingerror in the State’s peremptory challenge that was not race-neutral. Philmore argued that the trial court wrongly dismissed his motion to excludepictures of the victim’s body. He also claimed that the State madeimproper statements during both the guilt and penalty phase. Philmore claimed that the trial court improperly found the “avoid arrest”aggravator. He contended that the trial court failed by rejecting theunder extreme mental disturbance, substantial domination of another and theimpairment of capacity mitigators. The Florida Supreme Court found nomerit to any of Philmore’s arguments and affirmed his conviction and sentenceon 05/30/02.
On 07/05/02, Philmore filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorarito the United States Supreme Court, which subsequently was denied on 10/07/02.
On 09/16/03, Philmore filed a 3.850 Motion to the CircuitCourt, which was denied on 05/13/04.
On 06/14/04, Philmore filed a 3.850 Appeal to the FloridaSupreme Court. On appeal, Philmore asserts that the trial court erred indenying several of his claims of ineffective counsel (during pre-indictmenttrial, jury selection, penalty phase, and in conceding Philmore’s guilt). Accordingly, Philmore’s reliance on the Court’s 2003 decision in the Nixon caseto support his claim of ineffective counsel is without merit. On06/15/06, the Court affirmed the trial court’s denial of Philmore’s 3.850Motion. The mandate was issued on 09/15/06.
On 02/09/05, Philmore filed a Petition for Writ of HabeasCorpus to the Florida Supreme Court. Philmore raised four claims thetrial failed to consider: (1) expert testimony, (2) the constitutionalityof Florida’s death penalty statute, (3) ineffective assistance of trial counsel,(4) jury instructions, and (5) competency at the time of execution (violationof his Eighth Amendment rights). Philmore argues that the cumulativeeffect of the trail errors deprived him of a fundamentally fair trial. Since the Court concluded that Philmore’s other claims were without merit orwere procedurally barred, the Court further concluded that Philmore that therewas no cumulative effect to consider and was not deprived of a fundamentallyfair trial. The Petition was denied on 06/15/06 and the mandate wasissued on 09/15/06.
On 09/22/06, Philmore filed a Petition for Writ of HabeasCorpus to the United States District Court, Southern District, which was deniedon 07/17/07. On 07/30/07, Philmore filed a Motion for Certificate ofAppealability which was granted on 07/31/07.
On 08/14/07, Philmore filed a Habeas Appeal in the UnitedStates Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit. This court affirmed the denial ofPhilmore’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus on 07/23/09.
On 12/10/09, Philmore filed a Petition for Writ ofCertiorari to the United States Supreme Court. This petition was deniedon 03/22/10.
Institutional Adjustment:
DATE DAYS VIOLATION LOCATION
-------- ---- ---------------------------- -------------------
12/22/00 8 REF. SUB. ABUSE TEST FLORIDASTATE PRISON
06/14/01 0 DISOBEYINGORDER FLORIDA STATE PRISON
08/27/01 0 MAILVIOLATIONS FLORIDASTATE PRISON
________________________________________________________________________
Report Date: 07/29/03 EMC
Approved: 09/02/03 WS
Updated: 03/26/10 CAR