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. 

PEREZ, Daniel Ely (H/M)

DC# 557203

DOB:  11/25/77

Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County Case #01-3058

Sentencing Judge:  The Honorable Burton Conner

Attorney, Trial:  Mark Harllee – Chief Assistant PublicDefender

Attorney, Direct Appeal:  Gary Lee Caldwell – AssistantPublic Defender

Date of Offense:  08/28/01

Date of Sentence:  07/21/03

Date of Resentence: 07/22/06

Circumstances of Offense:

On 05/08/03, Daniel Ely Perez was convicted of thefirst-degree felony murder of his wife’s aunt, Susan Martin – a single,52-year-old, who was hearing impaired. 

On 08/29/01, a police officer of the Port St. Lucie PoliceDepartment was responding to a 911 call requesting that a welfare check beconducted at Susan Martin’s residence.  The officer arrived at Martin’sresidence at around 1:45 p.m.  After several unsuccessful attempts to makecontact with the occupant (by ringing the doorbell and knocking), the officeropened the front door, which was unlocked.  The officer found Martin lyingon her back with several stab wounds, head trauma, and blood all over thefloor.  The officer immediately closed the door and notified policeheadquarters.  A police detective, who previously investigated a theftthat was reported by Martin (which she reported Perez to the police forstealing her ring and other jewelry), was called to the crime scene to identifythe victim. 

The interior of the houseappeared to have been ransacked because drawers were opened with content dumpedout and strewn about. Martin’s body was found lying approximately seven feetaway from the front door, and several shoeprints were discovered in the pool ofblood near Martin’s body and toward the bathroom area. 

On 08/29/01, Perez was summoned by the lead detective of thecase for an interview, which Perez voluntarily accepted.  The investigatordiscovered that Perez had sold several items that Martin had reported missingfrom the theft incident to the local pawn shop.  When asked about theaccusations of jewelry theft from Martin’s residence, Perez denied anyinvolvement; however, over the course of the interview, Perez changed his storyseveral times.  The police arrested Perez for the prior jewelry theft.

After further questioning with regard to Martin’s stabbing,Perez revealed to the investigator a plan that he had with Gary Reed and CalvinGreen to steal Martin’s car (a Chevrolet Tahoe) in which he supplied both menwith directions to the residence.  During the interview, Perez frequentlyrevised his story.  In his final version of the stabbing incident, onlyone car was driven to the scene and that Reed was never actually present at theresidence.  In addition, Perez admitted that he witnessed Green stabbingMartin and heard her gargling on blood.  Perez followed Green out the frontdoor, as Green was grabbing things and placing them into a bag.  They werewearing socks on their hands, prior to entering the house. 

On 09/06/01, Perez accompanied and directed the police toshow them where he and Green disposed of the various contents of the stabbingincident.  The police were able to recover several items:  (1) a bagthat was removed from Martin’s residence, (2) the key to Martin’s car, (3) awatch belonging to Martin, (4) a “doo-rag”, and (5) a pen allegedly belongingto Martin.  Perez, further, attempted to direct the police to the murderweapon and area where he dumped his bloody clothes and bloody shoes – neitheritems were recovered. 

During trial, the medicalexaminer revealed that Martin suffered a blunt force injury to the left side ofthe head resulting in bruising and laceration. The bruising underlying thelaceration indicated that Martin was alive when she was struck.  Overall,Martin suffered 94 stab wounds, which averaged one-half inch in length,indicating that one weapon was used in the stabbing.  The medical examineralso pointed out that there were several indications that Martin was alive atthe time these wounds were inflicted.  Furthermore, red marks on Martin’sneck indicated that something had been pulled against her neck, such as a thinlace.  The medical examiner testified that the wounds to Martin’s neckwere determined to have been a character to be lethal, as were several to theright side torso, where the weapon entered her liver.

Codefendant Information:

Calvin Cedric Green (DC# 125237)

On 07/22/03, Greenpleaded no contest to manslaughter (CC# 01-3058) and was sentenced to 15 yearsfor his involvement in the armed robbery, armed burglary, and murder of Martin.

Gary Reed

Reed was neither triednor convicted for his involvement in the armed robbery, armed burglary, andmurder of Martin. 

Prior Incarceration History in the State of Florida:

Trial Summary:

08/29/01          Indictedas follows:

                                    CountI:           First-Degree Felony Murder

                                    CountII:         Armed Burglary with a Deadly Weapon

                                    CountIII:        Armed Robbery with a Deadly Weapon          

05/08/03          Juryreturned guilty verdicts on all counts of the indictment.

05/13/03          Juryrecommended death by a vote of 9-3.

07/21/03          Sentencedas follows:

                                    CountI:           First-Degree Felony Murder – Death

                                    CountII:         Armed Burglary with a Deadly Weapon – Life

                                    CountIII:        Armed Robbery with a Deadly Weapon – Life

07/22/06          JudgeBurton Conner imposed a life sentence without the possibility of parole, whichwill run consecutive to two life sentences Perez is already serving for                       armedburglary and robbery with a deadly weapon.

Appeal Summary:

Florida Supreme Court – Direct Appeal

FSC# 03-1651

919 So.2d 347

09/11/03          Appealfiled.

10/27/05          FSC affirmed conviction, vacatedthe death sentence, and remanded for resentencing.

01/05/06          Rehearing denied.

01/23/06          Mandate issued.

UnitedStates Supreme Court – Petition for Writ of Certiorari

USSC# 05-10186

03/31/06         Petition filed.

06/05/06         Petition denied.

Case Information:

On 09/11/03, Perez fileda Direct Appeal to the Florida Supreme Court.  He raised seven mainissues.  First, Perez claimed a juror failed to disclose her relationshipwith a State witness during voir dire when the State read its witness list tothe jury pool.  Second, he claimed the trial court erred by not excludingstatements from evidence, which were illegally obtained by the police (he wascoerced and forced or under duress at the times of the statements and that hemade the statements without knowing about the voluntary waiver of his rightsand without the benefit of counsel).  Third, Perez asserted that there wasinsufficient evidence presented at trial to establish that he either killedMartin or was a major participant in the felonies committed and acted with areckless disregard for human life.  Fourth, he claimed the trial courtabused its discretion when it assigned little weight to the statutorymitigating circumstance that the murder was committed while Perez was under theinfluence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance.  Fifth, Perezcontended the trial court abused its discretion when it failed to acknowledgemitigating circumstances of his bad upbringing and sexual abuse, as well as acombination of antisocial personality and borderline personalityfeatures.  Sixth, Perez asserted the trial court erred when it refused toallow the defense to present evidence that Martin and his entire family opposedthe death penalty.  Finally, Perez claimed the Florida capital sentencingscheme violates his Sixth Amendment right and his right to due process underthe holding of Ring v. Arizona.  On 10/27/05, the Florida SupremeCourt affirmed Perez’s convictions but vacated the death sentence because itwas not proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the penalty phase jury’s improperconsideration of the heinous, atrocious, or cruel (HAC) aggravator did not contributeto the recommended death sentence.  The Court concluded that HAC waserroneously applied to Perez.  As a result, the Court remanded the caseback to the Circuit Court for resentencing.  On 01/05/06, the rehearingwas denied.  The mandate was issued on 01/23/06.

On 03/31/06, Perez fileda Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court, which wasdenied on 06/05/06.

________________________________________________________________________

Report Date:   10/27/05          NRC

Updated:         12/05/07          AEH