Murderpedia

 

 

Juan Ignacio Blanco  

 

  MALE murderers

index by country

index by name   A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

  FEMALE murderers

index by country

index by name   A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

 

 

 
   

Murderpedia has thousands of hours of work behind it. To keep creating new content, we kindly appreciate any donation you can give to help the Murderpedia project stay alive. We have many
plans and enthusiasm to keep expanding and making Murderpedia a better site, but we really
need your help for this. Thank you very much in advance.

   

 

 

Daniel Patrick HAUSER

 
 
 
 
 

 

 

 

 
 
 
Classification: Murderer
Characteristics: To satisfy a longtime urge to kill
Number of victims: 1
Date of murder: January 1, 1995
Date of arrest: February 10, 1995
Date of birth: July 24, 1970
Victim profile: Melanie Rodrigues (female, 21)
Method of murder: Strangulation
Location: Okaloosa County, Florida, USA
Status: Executed by lethal injection in Florida on August 25, 2000
 
 
 
 
 

Florida Supreme Court
Briefs and Opinions

 
 

Docket #87580 - Dan Patrick Hauser, Appellant, vs. State of Florida, Appellee.
701 So. 2d 329; September 18, 1997.

 

opinion

initial brief of appellant

 

answer brief of appellee

reply brief of appellant

 
 
 

Docket #SC00-1664 and SC00-1665 - Dan Patrick Hauser, by his next friends Zainna Fawnn Crawford, and Gregory C. Smith, Capital Collateral Counsel, Petitioner, vs. Michael Moore, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, and James Crosby, Warden, Florida State Prison, Respondents. 767 So. 2d 436; August 18, 2000.

 

opinion

 
 
 
 
 
 

Summary:

Hauser, originally from Dublin, Calif., pleaded no-contest to First Degree Murder after confessing he had randomly chosen his victim, Melanie Rodrigues, 21, who worked at a convenience store and Sammy's, a topless bar.

He said he strangled the woman to satisfy a longtime urge to kill. The victim's body was found 2 days later under a bed in a Fort Walton Beach area motel room less than a mile from Sammy's.

Hauser confessed to the killing after he was arrested in Reno, Nev. on Feb. 10, 1995 on a charge of stealing a pickup truck in North Carolina.

Hauser waived all appeals, claiming to be a "believer" in the death penalty.

 
 

The facts

Melanie Rodrigues, an exotic dancer at Sammy’s on the Island in Fort Walton Beach, left work at 2 a.m., January 1, 1995, and did not report for work later that day. Her partially nude body was found two days later beneath a bed in Room 223 of the EconoLodge near Sammy’s. She had been strangled.

Motel records showed that Room 223 had last been rented to Hauser, and when he was arrested the following month in Nevada, Hauser told police that he had been in Fort Walton Beach at the time of the murder, had visited several bars that night, but could not recall the latter part of the evening because he had been too drunk. Rodrigues’ car keys, house key, and underpants were found in his truck. Additionally, his fingerprint was found on a cigarette package next to her body.

At the plea hearing, Hauser admitted his guilt and the judge accepted his plea. Prior to sentencing, Hauser submitted a written request to meet with Investigator Griggs. When Griggs went to the jail, Hauser handed him a handwritten note containing the following statement:

On Dec. 31st at around 4:00 p.m. I started going to the local bars looking for a girl I could get to come back to my room. I went to all the strip joints in the area, but spent most of my time at Sammy’s on the Island. When I first went to Sammy’s I noticed one girl who seemed new and a little uneasy. So I kept up with what she was doing. For a few hours I had her and a couple other girls dance for me and also sat at the stage. I left and started going to the other clubs and bars, but there wasn’t anything going on anywhere else so around 12:00-12:30 am I went back to Sammy’s. I knew Satin had to have cash, I had given her around $100-150 during the night. After watching her for a while I knew if there was going to be anyone who I could get back to my room this would be the one. She was small, easy to overpower and new yet still making money.

For the next few hours I had her and a couple of other girls dance for me, then at around 2:00-2:30 I asked her if she wanted to make a couple hundred dollars to come back to my hotel room with me. . . .

 . . . We went inside and she took off her clothes and started to dance, after dancing for awhile she came over to where I was sitting on the bed and grabbed at my pants, so I stood up and took off my clothes and we got onto the bed and had sex. We lay in bed for awhile then she got up and danced a little longer then had sex again. She lay next to me for around 30-45 minutes then said she had to get going home. So I stood up at the end of the bed and asked her to give me a hug. I was standing there in front of her thinking this is my last chance, if I want to kill her I am going to have to do it now! So just as we pulled apart I put my hands around her neck and threw her on the bed. I came down on top of her waist and pinned down her arms with my elbows. I put only enough pressure so she could not scream. I wanted to watch the fear in her eyes. I let up so she could take a breath and just stared at her while she started to lose consciousness, then let her breathe again and said well this is it. I put as much pressure as I could and held it until she gave this shake and her body tensed up then went limp. To make sure she was dead I didn’t let go for awhile. I put my ear to her chest to make certain I couldn’t hear a heart beat.

 
 

ProDeathPenalty.com

A drifter set for execution next month for murdering a Fort Walton Beach stripper on New Year's Day 1995 wants no last-ditch appeal made on his behalf.

Dan Patrick Hauser, 29, submitted letters to the Florida Supreme Court in Tallahassee to tell the justices and a state agency that represents death row inmates not to force a lawyer on him for an appeal he opposes. Gov. Jeb Bush on June 29 signed a death warrant ordering Hauser's execution by lethal injection Aug. 22 at Florida State Prison in Starke.

Hauser, originally from Dublin, Calif., pleaded no-contest to 1st-degree murder after confessing he had randomly chosen his victim, Melanie Rodrigues, 21, who worked at a convenience store and Sammy's, a topless bar. He said he strangled the woman to satisfy a longtime urge to kill.

The victim's body was found 2 days later under a bed in a Fort Walton Beach area motel room less than a mile from Sammy's. Hauser confessed to the killing after he was arrested in Reno, Nev., on Feb. 10, 1995 on a charge of stealing a pickup truck in North Carolina.

One of Hauser's letters was addressed to Gregory Smith, a lawyer with the Capital Collateral Counsel-Northern Region.

A lawyer from the governor's office in June had asked Smith to determine if his agency should get involved. Smith declined comment on whether such involvement is being considered. "Attempts to represent me against my will only serve to add to the suffering of the victim's family and my family," Hauser wrote.

He also asked to the Supreme Court to direct Smith "not to interfere, or try to force representation on me." Hauser has been visited on death row by his adoptive parents, a California college teacher and a copier salesman.

Hauser has been appointed an attorney to "stand by" in case he wants legal advice. 8/18/00 - Dan Patrick Hauser, convicted of the heinous torture-murder of a strip club worker in 1995, wants to be executed. Tuesday evening, he has a date with a lethal injection at Florida State Prison in Starke. But first he has to get past his mother.

Hauser is a believer in the death penalty who has fought to keep lawyers from appealing on his behalf. But on Thursday, state-funded lawyers who handle death appeals filed an emergency request with the Florida Supreme Court, claiming Hauser's execution is simply suicide and the state has no business helping him.

The lawyers filed the request on behalf of his mother, Zainna Fawnn Crawford. "The only question is whether the state of Florida is going to be the means by which Dan Hauser is going to commit suicide," said Tim Schardl, legal coordinator for the Capital Collateral Counsel office in Tallahassee, who filed the emergency appeal.

Hauser himself, though, is having none of it. As soon as the unusual petition hit the high court Thursday, Hauser himself fired off a handwritten rebuttal to the justices, basically telling his mother and the lawyers to butt out. Saying he "fully" understands the penalty for his crime, Hauser called their intervention a "last minute, hail-Mary approach to scare this court into backing anti-death-penalty crusaders' attempt to define justice as they see fit."

It is unclear whether the death-penalty lawyers' last-minute tactic may work, but it may at least result in the execution being delayed long enough for Hauser to get a new psychological evaluation, said Bruce Winick, a University of Miami criminal law professor who specializes on criminal procedure law.

Hauser, 30, a drifter from Washington state with a penchant for stealing cars, burglarizing houses and conning people, was condemned to death for the New Year's Day 1995 strangulation murder of Melanie Rodrigues, 21, in Fort Walton Beach. He confessed almost immediately after he was arrested near Reno, Nev., in February 1995.

He pleaded guilty and, just before his sentencing hearing, wrote out a detailed, gruesome description of how he brutally killed Rodrigues, who worked selling champagne in a strip club not far from the motel where her body was found.

But Schardl, the death-appeals lawyer, says Hauser made up the details to deliberately draw a death sentence from the judge. "Mr. Hauser's death sentence is based entirely and exclusively on information that is provided by Mr. Hauser that is false," Schardl wrote.

The problem, Schardl said, is that most of the worst stuff was made up and inconsistent with the evidence that crime scene experts and the medical examiner found. "The basis for his death sentence is invalid, based on falsehoods deliberately perpetrated by Mr. Hauser, in an effort to subvert the course of justice . . . and in order to enlist the state in his grandiose attempt at suicide," Schardl wrote in his 32-page motion to the high court. In a phone interview Thursday, Schardl added: "We know he made up evidence to make it a death penalty case."

In his written description of the crime, Hauser wrote that he had been planning to kill someone and picked Rodrigues because she was "weak and naive." He said after he and Rodrigues had sex, he asked her for a hug, then began a slow game of torture, choking her until she passed out, then letting her revive before doing it again.

Finally, he wrote, he told her, "Well, this is it," and pressed down on her throat until she died. "I wanted to watch the fear in her eyes," he wrote. He said he pressed so hard his hands were sore for 6 days.

Yet in an earlier confession that was not part of the court record, Schardl said, Hauser told police that the death happened quickly and that he didn't know why he killed the woman. Schardl said the physical evidence, such as bruises and a broken bone in Rodrigues' throat, was highly inconsistent with Hauser's description.

Hauser lied about not having been treated for mental illness, Schardl said. The lawyer is attacking a March 1999 psychological examination of Hauser that judged he was competent to be executed. In his emergency request Thursday,

Schardl submitted the opinion of a psychiatrist who said her review of the case leads her to believe Hauser is not competent to abandon his appeals. Hauser's response to the court Thursday said the lawyers were trying to "subvert" his constitutional right to represent himself and are relying on the opinions of people who have never met him.

Hauser said he has subjected himself to every examination, every line of questioning possible to determine that he is competent to represent himself and to choose not to postpone his execution.

Shortly after Hauser's arrest, he told Stan Griggs, the lead Okaloosa County Sheriff's detective in the case, that he believed in the death penalty. He said the same thing to Jim Tongue, his public defender in Fort Walton Beach. "He admitted what he had done and said that he basically believes in the system and he should take his punishment," Tongue said. "He did not want to spend the rest of his life in prison."

When Gov. Jeb Bush signed Hauser's death warrant earlier this year, he asked the Capital Collateral Counsel office to investigate whether representation by the agency was warranted. Schardl said he has met with Hauser several times and feels the intervention is warranted. But that can only happen if the Florida Supreme Court allows it.

Winick, the University of Miami lawyer, said the Supreme Court will probably order another psychological evaluation. "If he is competent, he can make the decision, because it is his life," Winick said. "But when a life is at stake, the state should examine him."

UPDATE: This motion was dismissed by a 4-3 vote of the Supreme Court for lack of standing. This means the execution can proceed, however, Hauser could halt it at anytime.

8/18/00 UPDATE: Despite the dismissal, the Capital Collateral Counsel office has filed a petition asking for a rehearing of this issue.

8/22/00 UPDATE: A US District Court has issued a stay of execution based on the petition filed against Hauser's wishes. Judge Stephan Mickle has granted a stay to allow himself enough time for a "meaningful review".

8/24/00 UPDATE: This stay was lifted by a federal court and the execution has been rescheduled for August 25.

 
 

Daniel Patrick hauser

St. Petersburg Times Online

Dan Patrick Hauser has waived all appeals and fired his attorneys since admitting that he killed a Fort Walton Beach dancer. Okaloosa County sheriff's investigator Stan Griggs got a call from the county jail Dec. 12, 1995. Dan Patrick Hauser wanted to talk to him.

The month before, Hauser had pleaded no contest to first-degree murder for strangling 21-year-old topless dancer Melanie Rodrigues in his Fort Walton Beach motel room. He had not been sentenced for the crime, but prosecutors wanted the death penalty.

Griggs went to the jail at 10:45 p.m., and Hauser handed him an envelope. Inside were two handwritten pages from a yellow legal pad, filled on both sides with a confession that would seal Hauser's fate. Hauser is to be executed by lethal injection at 6 p.m. Tuesday at Florida State Prison in Starke.

It's what he wants. "Those who commit murder are a different kind of people," said Robert Augustus Harper, a Tallahassee lawyer Hauser fired. "To commit self-murder is in effect what is being allowed here, using the instrument of the state instead of a piece of a bedsheet." The pages Hauser gave to Griggs that night in 1995 lay out the cold details of a murder.

"She was small, easy to overpower and new (as a dancer), yet still making money," Hauser wrote in the confession, explaining how he picked Rodrigues from among dancers at a topless bar to lure back to his motel room with the offer of $200.

There, she danced naked for him again, and they had sex twice before she stood up to leave, he wrote. "I stood up at the end of the bed and asked her to give me a hug," Hauser wrote. "I was standing there in front of her thinking, 'This is my last chance; if I want to kill her I am going to have to do it now!' "So just as we pulled apart, I put my hands around her neck and threw her on the bed. . . . I put only enough pressure so she could not scream. I wanted to watch the fear in her eyes. I let up so she could take a breath and just stared at her while she started to lose consciousness, then let her breathe again and said, 'Well, this is it.' I put as much pressure as I could and held it until she gave this shake and her body tensed up then went limp." He stashed Rodrigues' body under a bed, cleaned up the room, and began driving west.

Because Hauser had rented the Econo Lodge room in his own name, officers were able to track him to an RV park in Reno, Nev. He liked the feeling of power over Rodrigues while he was killing her, and thought about killing other women before and afterward, but didn't, because "things just didn't work out," he told Griggs.

Hauser told Griggs, " 'I've always been for the death penalty, and I'm not going to change my mind because I'm in hot water,' " Griggs remembered last week. Since then, Hauser has fired his attorneys and waived his appeals in neat, handwritten motions he mails to court.

Still, the Florida Supreme Court held an appeal hearing, and Gov. Jeb Bush held a clemency hearing against his wishes. Both upheld the death sentence. Lawyers with the Capital Collateral Counsel, who represent indigent condemned prisoners, filed 150 pages of motions this week on Hauser's behalf but against his wishes.

Hauser is a bipolar manic depressive who needs medication, and that makes him legally incompetent to represent himself and waive appeals, CCC lawyer Gregory C. Smith contended.

Hauser made up the terrible details he included in his confession after researching aggravating factors in the jail library to ensure he would be sentenced to die, Smith argued. Before that, he had told investigators and his lawyers he was confused and anguished about the crime and could not remember exactly how or why it happened. The Supreme Court ruled Friday that CCC had no right to help Hauser against his wishes.

Hauser's adoptive parents in Oregon find the situation too painful to talk about. Smith's brief says they apparently support their son's decision to be executed. Rodrigues' mother said she remains filled with anguish over the loss of her only child, a kind-hearted girl who loved the beach and went out of her way to help friends.

Rodrigues helped manage a Destin convenience store and danced at Sammy's on the Island only as a temporary second job, Pamela Belford of Fort Walton Beach said. She wants Hauser to die. "He's not going to put another family through this," she said. "He's not going to take a beautiful human being and take her life."

Prisoners executed in Florida since 1976 spent an average of 11.3 years on death row. Because he has not fought his sentence, Hauser has been there just 4 1/2. Many of the 370 Florida death row inmates have been there more than 20 years. Still, on June 29, Bush chose Hauser to die next.

The lack of appeals "obviously moved it to the top of the stack," Bush's spokeswoman Elizabeth Hirst explained Friday. "It was appropriate timing for the warrant to be signed." When the state changed its primary method of execution from the electric chair to lethal injection in January,

Bush also signed a law that would have taken away the right for condemned prisoners to file many appeals, shortening the typical stay on death row to about the time Hauser has served. The Supreme Court struck down the law as unconstitutional. Unless Bush suddenly changes his mind before Tuesday night, or a court intervenes against Hauser's wishes, he will be the fifth person Florida executes by lethal injection.

 
 

Fight the Death Penalty USA

A man who said he murdered a woman to satisfy an urge to kill died by lethal injection Friday, a day after a stay of execution was lifted.

Dan Patrick Hauser, 30, was condemned for the New Year's Day 1995 murder of Melanie Rodrigues, 21, who worked in a Destin convenience store, and at Sammy's, a nightspot, in Fort Walton Beach. Hauser was pronounced dead at 6:08 p.m., said Elizabeth Hirst, spokeswoman for Gov. Jeb Bush. She said there were no complications.

Hauser, who fired his attorney and fought attempts to spare his life, had received a 3-day reprieve Tuesday when U.S. District Judge Stephan Mickle stayed his execution. The judge was asked to consider evidence that Hauser was incapable of making a rational decision to drop his appeals because he has suffered from a mental disorder since his teens.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta lifted the stay Thursday afternoon and the state rescheduled the execution for 6 p.m. Friday. Hauser was arrested in Reno, Nevada, on Feb. 10, 1995, and confessed to the killing. He told investigators he decided to satisfy an urge to kill.

In his confession, Hauser expressed disappointment that he didn't experience the "rush" he anticipated when he slowly strangled Rodrigues. He did say he was pleased "to watch the fear in her eyes" and that he felt no remorse.

Authorities believe Hauser arrived in Okaloosa County on Friday, Dec. 31, 1994, and rented a room at the Edgewater Apartments in Fort Walton Beach. Rodrigues left work at Sammy's and met Hauser, who apparently lured her back to his room.

On Jan. 3, 1995, deputies found her car in the motel's parking lot, and her partially nude body was found in his room, hidden under a mattress. rison officials said Hauser didn't want a special final meal and so his meal of Asian food on Tuesday was his last. Since then, Hauser has eaten only candy bars and crackers, said Department of Corrections spokesman C.J. Drake.

On Monday, Circuit Judge Thomas Remington agreed with Hauser he was competent to represent himself and drop all appeals. "I fully understand everything that's going on," Hauser told Remington in a conference call. Death-penalty opponents have characterized Hauser's execution as "assisted suicide."

Since executions resumed in 1979, Hauser is the second Florida inmate to fight attempts to spare him. In 1993, Michael Alan Durocher was executed after fighting attempts to block his death. Durocher, 33, pleaded guilty to the slaying of his baby son, his girlfriend, and her young daughter in Clay County.

Hauser becomes the 5th condemned inmate to be put to death this year in Florida and the 49th overall since the state resumed capital punishment in 1979. 5 executions in 1 year are the most since 1984 when 12 men died in Florida's electric chair.

All 5 this year have been by lethal injection. Hauser becomes the 63rd condemend inmate to be put to death this year in the USA and the 661st overall since America resumed executions on January 17, 1977.

 
 

Dan Hauser

Jacksonville.com

The defendant in the hearing before Bush and the Cabinet, Dan Hauser, did not appear to be a good candidate for clemency. He pleaded guilty to strangling Melanie Rodriguez of Fort Walton Beach on New Year's Day in 1995. Prosecutors said he is not contesting the death penalty.

The Florida Supreme Court unanimously upheld the death penalty, Hauser fired his court-appointed lawyers, filed no further appeals and was not represented at the clemency hearing in Tallahassee. Still, Bush held the proceeding out of what an aide said was "an abundance of caution."

The four men executed since Bush took office last year all had clemency proceedings under Chiles. Bush and the Cabinet heard from the victim's mother and cousin and a prosecutor, who all urged that Hauser be executed.

Bush said in an interview before the hearing that the disappearance of clemency in recent years was due to the fact that the court appeals process was working. "So when it gets to the clemency area, while it's another safeguard, it is seldom used because the process works pretty well," Bush said.

But whether the decline of clemency reflects improved court procedures or a hardening of attitude toward crime is a matter of dispute among supporters and opponents of the death penalty.

 
 

Daniel Hauser

GateLessGate.org

July 1970 Dan Hauser was born

September 1970 Dan Hauser was adopted

January 1995 Dan Hauser was charged for murder

August 2000 Dan Hauser was executed

Dan Hauser first came to my attention on March 4, 2000, when a Tibetan (KTG) group asked me if I could help get a mala for a Death Row inmate. I contacted Dan for more information.

At the same time, I offered to send him books and visit with him. However, I also told him that if I were to visit with him, it would have to be as a chaplain because my pastoral status within the Florida prison system would be terminated with any private visits. (There are ten prisons that I visit a minimum of once a month.)

He welcomed the visit, and we met for the first time that month. In March, he told me what he expected as the timetable for his execution. I checked with the prison chaplain because it sounded awfully fast considering he had been on Death Row for such a short time.

I was led to believe that inmates were not always a reliable source of information; it appears he was the only one who knew his situation. Dan took precepts on Death Row in June. Shortly thereafter, the Death Warrant was signed, and he was moved from Union CI to Florida State Prison for execution.

My sense is that the precepts would have been difficult, if not impossible, to do in the Death Watch area had we waited to do them after the Death Warrant was signed. Pastoral counseling changes from one hour a month prior to the Death Warrant being signed to a maximum of 12 hours a week afterward.

My situation was such that I could only make two trips a week for the first three weeks and three trips a week for the next three or four weeks. Visits after the Death Warrant is signed are limited to weekdays between 9 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. Visitation and travel meant the loss of an entire working day.

 
 

223 F.3d 1316 (11th Cir. 2000)

Dan Patrick HAUSER, by his next friends Zainna Fawnn CRAWFORD, and Gregory C. Smith, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Michael W. MOORE, Secretary Florida Department of Corrections, James Crosby, Warden, Florida State Prison, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 00-90028.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Aug. 24, 2000.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida.

Before DUBINA, BLACK and CARNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Dan Patrick Hauser is a Florida death row inmate. Hauser's execution was scheduled for 6:00 p.m., August 22, 2000; however, at 2:05 p.m. that same day, the district court granted a stay of execution. The state has filed with this court a Notice of Appeal and Motion to Vacate Stay of Execution and, alternatively, Motion to Dismiss any appeal by CCRC and Crawford. Hauser has also personally filed a Motion to Vacate Stay of Execution in thiscourt. In his motion, Hauser requests that this court "will see Next Friends petition for what it is, an anti-death penalty crusaders attempt to overwhelm the courts with volumes of paper work and stay the execution and subvert a competent defendants right to self-representation." Hauser also states that "Next Friends have no standing to present these claims and as such, Hauser contends that he retains all right to bring forth petitions on his own behalf."

I. BACKGROUND

A. Facts

The facts are taken verbatim from the Florida Supreme Court's decision affirming Hauser's conviction and sentence of death:

Hauser was indicted for first-degree murder, pled nolo contendere, and stipulated to the following facts. Melanie Rodrigues, an exotic dancer at Sammy's on the Island in Fort Walton Beach, left work at 2 a.m., January 1, 1995, and did not report for work later that day. Her partially nude body was found two days later beneath a bed in Room 223 of the EconoLodge near Sammy's. She had been strangled.

Motel records showed that Room 223 had last been rented to Hauser, and when he was arrested the following month in Nevada, Hauser told police that he had been in Fort Walton Beach at the time of the murder, had visited several bars that night, but could not recall the latter part of the evening because he had been too drunk. Rodrigues' car keys, house key, and underpants were found in his truck. Additionally, his fingerprint was found on a cigarette package next to her body.

At the plea hearing, Hauser admitted his guilt and the judge accepted his plea. Prior to sentencing, Hauser submitted a written request to meet with Investigator Griggs. When Griggs went to the jail, Hauser handed him a handwritten note containing the following statement:

On Dec. 31st at around 4:00 p.m. I started going to the local bars looking for a girl I could get to come back to my room. I went to all the strip joints in the area, but spent most of my time at Sammy's on the Island. When I first went to Sammy's I noticed one girl who seemed new and a little uneasy. So I kept up with what she was doing. For a few hours I had her and a couple other girls dance for me and also sat at the stage. I left and started going to the other clubs and bars, but there wasn't anything going on anywhere else so around 12:00-12:30 am I went back to Sammy's. I knew Satin had to have cash, I had given her around $100- 150 during the night. After watching her for a while I knew if there was going to be anyone who I could get back to my room this would be the one. She was small, easy to overpower and new yet still making money.

For the next few hours I had her and a couple of other girls dance for me, then at around 2:00-2:30 I asked her if she wanted to make a couple hundred dollars to come back to my hotel room with me....

... We went inside and she took off her clothes and started to dance, after dancing for awhile she came over to where I was sitting on the bed and grabbed at my pants, so I stood up and took off my clothes and we got onto the bed and had sex. We lay in bed for awhile then she got up and danced a little longer then had sex again. She lay next to me for around 30-45 minutes then said she had to get going home. So I stood up at the end of the bed and asked her to give me a hug. I was standing there in front of her thinking this is my last chance, if I want to kill her I am going to have to do it now! So just as we pulled apart I put my hands around her neck and threw her on the bed. I came down on top of her waist and pinned down her arms with my elbows. I put only enough pressure so she could not scream. I wanted towatch the fear in her eyes. I let up so she could take a breath and just stared at her while she started to lose consciousness, then let her breathe again and said well this is it. I put as much pressure as I could and held it until she gave this shake and her body tensed up then went limp. To make sure she was dead I didn't let go for awhile. I put my ear to her chest to make certain I couldn't hear a heart beat.

Hauser v. State, 701 So.2d 329, 329-30 (Fla.1997).

B. Procedural History

Hauser filed a waiver of all collateral and/or post-conviction relief proceedings, and the circuit court appointed attorney Robert A. Harper to represent Hauser. Hauser, pro se, filed a motion to dismiss Mr. Harper as his counsel and requested permission to proceed pro se. The circuit court appointed a competency expert, Dr. James Larson, Ph.D., a psychologist, to evaluate Hauser and submit a written report.

The circuit court then conducted a Faretta1 hearing on March 29, 1999. At the conclusion of the hearing, the circuit court found Hauser to be competent to dismiss his court appointed attorney, and on April 7, 1999, granted Hauser's petition to proceed pro se.

On October 20, 1999, the circuit court appointed John Conan Harrison to represent Hauser in his clemency proceedings. The court conducted a hearing on Hauser's motion to dismiss court appointed counsel. On January 4, 2000, the court, finding that there had been no change in circumstances since the previous hearings, granted Hauser's motion to dismiss. The court found that Hauser had sufficient present ability to proceed pro se and represent himself in a competent manner.

On July 18, 2000, Hauser submitted correspondence to the Florida Supreme Court and Capital Collateral Regional Counsel ("CCRC") expressing his continued desire to represent himself. Florida Governor Jeb Bush signed Hauser's death warrant on June 29, 2000.

On August 1, 2000, the Florida Assistant Attorney General filed a notice of filing and request for hearing asking the circuit court to conduct a Faretta-type hearing to determine if Hauser should continue to be allowed to proceed pro se. On the same day, Hauser filed a motion for summary judgment and dismissal of the state's request for a hearing, stating that his letters to the Florida Supreme Court and CCRC were "to inform them that any move to subvert my choice to represent myself" would, in his opinion, violate his constitutional right to represent himself.

In an August 3, 2000, order, the circuit court again found Hauser competent to proceed pro se. The court found that Hauser was "articulate in his written expressions with a rational and factual understanding of the proceedings." Specifically, the circuit court found that Hauser "has the capacity to appreciate the allegations against him, has an appreciation for the range and nature of the possible penalties that may be imposed upon him, understands the adversarial nature of these proceedings and the appellate process, and has the ability to disclose facts pertinent to these proceedings."

The court noted that Hauser has never vacillated or wavered from his desire to represent himself. Therefore, the court concluded that Hauser "has made a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary decision to waive his right to representation and is competent to proceed Pro Se."2

On August 16, 2000, purporting to act on behalf of Hauser, Gregory C. Smith from the CCRC, and Hauser's biological mother, Zainna Fawnn Crawford, filed in the Florida Supreme Court, a "Motion For Stay Of Execution, Permission To Initiate Belated Appeal Or Other Proceedings,And For Appoint Special Counsel." CCRC and Crawford sought permission to file a belated appeal from the circuit court's determination that Hauser is competent to dismiss post-conviction counsel and proceed pro se.

They also requested the appointment of a special counsel to ensure that all relevant evidence is presented to the courts. On August 18, 2000, the Florida Supreme Court denied the motions, finding that CCRC and Crawford did not have standing pursuant to Durocher v. Singletary, 623 So.2d 482 (Fla.1993). See Hauser v. Moore, --- So.2d ---- (Fla. August 18, 2000).

On August 18, 2000, the CCRC filed a "Notice to Court" stating that it had discovered several significant factual and legal matters that were not disclosed to the state circuit court in its prior considerations concerning Hauser's competency to waive post-conviction representation and proceedings. The CCRC requested that the circuit court take any action it deemed appropriate, including appointment of a special counsel to present this significant evidence to the court. The state filed a response, arguing that the CCRC has no standing to file anything purportedly on Hauser's behalf.

The state further argued that Hauser's competent assertions of his right to self-representation preclude any counsel from pleading on his behalf. The state noted that Hauser has been consistent over the past three years in asserting his right of self-representation and in making a knowing and intelligent waiver of his right to post-conviction counsel and proceedings.

The circuit court conducted a telephone conference on August 21, 2000, on the CCRC's "Notice to Court." Participating in the telephone conference were Hauser, his "stand-by" counsel Mr. Flowers, CCRC Special Assistant Capital Collateral Counsel Mr. Timothy Schardl, and Assistant Attorneys General Mr. Albert H. Grinsted, III, and Mr. Steve White. Mr. Schardl conceded that his office has no standing to file any pleadings on Hauser's behalf. He stated, however, that standing is not an issue because the CCRC did not request any relief in its "Notice to Court." Mr. Schardl stated that he felt an obligation to bring to the court's attention the significant psychological information contained within the pleadings CCRC previously filed in the Florida Supreme Court.

During the telephonic hearing, Hauser objected to the CCRC's attempt to present evidence on his behalf. He mentioned that the evidence the CCRC wished to submit was really "tools for mitigating issues for conviction or mitigation of the sentence, and as such, my decision to bring them before the Court." In response to the court's questions, Hauser acknowledged that he knew he would be put to death by lethal injection and he understood all the ramifications of the legal issues and defenses that he might have. Hauser further stated that all the evidence and arguments that CCRC presented are items "that should be my right to present in mitigation of either conviction or sentence." He succinctly stated the issue: "I think the issue here is am I competent right now to make this decision, not if any of these facts are true or false."

Following the telephone conference, the circuit court dismissed the CCRC's "Notice to Court," finding that CCRC does not have standing to proceed on Hauser's behalf. The circuit court stated that it was bound by the Florida Supreme Court's decision in Hauser v. Moore, --- So.2d ---- (Fla. August 18, 2000), and Hauser was found to be competent to represent himself and no one appealed this decision. Concluding, the circuit court noted that Hauser's appointed stand-by counsel was available to him if he requested legal advice.

The CCRC and Zainna Fawnn Crawford, as next friends of Dan Patrick Hauser, then filed a 28 U.S.C. 2254 petition in federal district court on August 21, 2000. In the petition, CCRC and Crawford allege five claims for federal court review. The state filed a response and the district court granted a stay of execution,pending further order of the court, due to time constraints and the seriousness of the matter. The state then filed in the district court a motion to lift the stay, which the district court has not granted.

II. DISCUSSION

We must first consider whether we have the authority to vacate the district court's stay. The standard of review of a stay of execution issued by a district court is abuse of discretion. See Delo v. Blair, 509 U.S. 823, 823, 113 S.Ct. 2922, 125 L.Ed.2d 751 (1993) (vacating as an abuse of discretion a court of appeals order granting a stay in a second or later petition case); Delo v. Stokes, 495 U.S. 320, 322, 110 S.Ct. 1880, 109 L.Ed.2d 325 (1990) (vacating as an abuse of discretion a district court's stay of execution in a fourth petition case).

This is a first petition case, filed by someone purporting to act as the condemned inmate's next-friend, not by the inmate himself. In Lonchar v. Thomas, 517 U.S. 314, 116 S.Ct. 1293, 134 L.Ed.2d 440 (1996), the Supreme Court vacated our judgment setting aside the district court's stay of execution in a first petition proceeding.

In doing so, the Court held that a district court could and should grant a stay in a first petition case unless the district court could dismiss the petition on the merits before the scheduled execution. Id. at 320, 116 S.Ct. 1293. ("If the district court cannot dismiss the petition on the merits before the scheduled execution, it is obligated to address the merits and must issue a stay to prevent the case from becoming moot.").

The present case is different from Lonchar because the "merits" here are not the merits of the underlying claims or any defense to them, but instead whether Hauser is competent to waive federal habeas review. Nonetheless, the Supreme Court's Lonchar decision provides us with guidance about what the rule should be in determining whether the stay ought to continue in this first petition, next friend case: the stay should continue if, but only if, necessary to provide the court with time to decide whether those purporting to act on the inmate's behalf have standing to do so.

In Bowersox v. Williams, 517 U.S. 345, 116 S.Ct. 1312, 134 L.Ed.2d 494 (1996), the Supreme Court, in vacating the court of appeals' order granting a stay after the district court had denied one, said that "the surface implausibility of those claims persuade us that the stay should not have been granted." Id. at 346, 116 S.Ct. 1312. Applying Bowersox to this situation, we should certainly vacate the stay if the standing claim of those purporting to represent Hauser are implausible under the standing and competency law we enunciated and applied in Lonchar v. Zant, 978 F.2d 637 (11th Cir.1992), and Ford v. Haley, 195 F.3d 603 (11th Cir.1999) (Ford II ).

Moreover, in Delo, the Supreme Court vacated a stay, concluding that it was an abuse of discretion "for a federal court to interfere with the orderly process of a State's criminal justice system in a case raising claims that are for all relevant purposes indistinguishable from those we recently rejected" in another decision. 509 U.S. at 823, 113 S.Ct. 2922. If the claim that Hauser is incompetent is materially indistinguishable from-certainly if it is not as strong as-the incompetency claim we rejected less than a year ago in Ford II, then under Delo, we should vacate the stay.

From the Supreme Court's Lonchar, Bowersox, and Delo decisions we draw the rule that we should vacate a stay of execution issued by a district court against the wishes of the death row inmate where continuation of the stay is not necessary in order to determine that those who sought the stay lack standing because the inmate is competent under the standards set down in established precedent. We do understand the position in which the district court found itself two days ago when the petition was filed the day before Hauser's scheduled execution.

This was similar to the district court's situation in Alabama v. Evans, 461 U.S. 230, 233 n. *, 103 S.Ct. 1736, 75 L.Ed.2d 806 (1983), when a petitionand motion for stay of execution was filed seven hours before the scheduled execution. Although the Supreme Court vacated the stay issued by the district court, in doing so it expressed understanding for "the difficult situation in which the district court found itself." Id. Notwithstanding our understanding about the position in which the district court found itself, we have an independent duty to rule on what has been filed in this court, which is the motion to vacate the stay of execution entered by the district court.

Now we must consider whether CCRC and Crawford have standing to proceed on Hauser's behalf. The Supreme Court set forth the requirements for "next friend" standing in Whitmore v. Arkansas, 495 U.S. 149, 110 S.Ct. 1717, 109 L.Ed.2d 135 (1990):

First, a "next friend" must provide an adequate explanation-such as inaccessibility, mental incompetence, or other disability-why the real party in interest cannot appear on his own behalf to prosecute the action. Second, the "next friend" must be truly dedicated to the best interests of the person on whose behalf he seeks to litigate, and it has been further suggested that a "next friend" must have some significant relationship with the party in interest.

495 U.S. at 163-64, 110 S.Ct. 1717, 109 L.Ed.2d 135 (citations omitted). See also Ford II, 195 F.3d at 624. CCRC and Crawford bear the burden to "clearly [ ] establish the propriety of [their] status and thereby justify the jurisdiction of the court." Id.

We have reservations that CCRC and Hauser's biological mother, who gave Hauser up for adoption, are "truly dedicated to the interests" of Hauser. CCRC did not enter these proceedings until recently and has never represented Hauser at his request. As Hauser himself stated, CCRC and Crawford's efforts appear to be motivated solely by their own desires to block imposition of the death penalty in an "attempt to define justice as they see fit." The most logical "next-friend" is Hauser's court-appointed counsel, Mr. Flowers; however, Hauser has expressed a desire that Mr. Flowers not file anything on his behalf.

In any event, for the reasons that follow, we conclude that CCRC and Crawford cannot establish that Hauser is unable to pursue his own cause due to mental incompetency. The record establishes just the opposite. In Rees v. Peyton, 384 U.S. 312, 86 S.Ct. 1505, 16 L.Ed.2d 583 (1966), the Supreme Court established the test for determining a petitioner's competency to waive post-conviction proceedings in a capital case.

Applying the Rees test "involves a determination of (1) whether that person suffers from a mental disease, disorder, or defect; (2) whether a mental disease, disorder, or defect prevents that person from understanding his legal position and the options available to him; and (3) whether a mental disease, disorder, or defect prevents that person from making a rational choice among his options." Lonchar, 978 F.2d at 641-42. See also Ford II, 195 F.3d at 617.

In Ford II, we affirmed the district court's findings that petitioner was competent to dismiss his 2254 petition, discharge his counsel, and be executed. The petitioner suffered from depression and a personality disorder, thought he was going to sit at God's left hand and be an important person, stated that he had many wives, concubines, and children whom he had visited in various parts of the world, and that he had once "visited Heaven." 195 F.3d at 612-13.

The district court, relying on the three-prong test enunciated in Lonchar, found Ford to be competent. The district court in Ford II noted that in Lonchar, the Eleventh Circuit had found Lonchar competent because he knew what he had been charged with, the penalty that had been given, and the ultimate outcome if the penalty was imposed on him. See id. at 615. Moreover, this court had acknowledged that Lonchar was competent because he exhibited a basic understanding of the habeas proceedings, persisted in hisopposition to further review of his convictions, and stated that he understood that without further proceedings he would be executed. See id.

Therefore, the district court in Ford II found that Ford, like Lonchar, "understood the 'bottom line' of his legal situation-that he must continue to engage in the review process or be executed-and that he was able to make a rational choice among these options." Ford II, 195 F.3d at 615. The district court in Ford II also acknowledged that Ford suffered from "significant behavioral and emotional problems," but plainly understood that "in his legal situation, he must choose either to continue his legal challenges or be executed." Id.

Furthermore, the district court found that Ford satisfied Lonchar's third prong because he had rational reasons for choosing to die: he was tired of languishing in prison; he was pessimistic he would ever get out of prison; and he truly believed he would be happier in the afterlife. See id. This court affirmed the district court's findings and conclusions in Ford II.

In this case, the facts establishing Hauser's competency are even stronger than those establishing Ford's competency in Ford II. Hauser clearly satisfies Lonchar's second and third prongs. The state trial court on several occasions determined that Hauser is competent to proceed pro se due to his repeated statements that he wished to proceed pro se; his letters to the court expressing his wishes; his statements during the telephonic hearing that he understood the ramifications of his wish to proceed pro se, that he knew he would be executed by lethal injection, and that the evidence CCRC wanted to submit was really evidence of mitigation.

The trial court concluded that Hauser "has the capacity to appreciate the allegations against him, has an appreciation for the range and nature of these proceedings and the appellate process, and has the ability to disclose facts pertinent to those proceedings." August 7, 2000, Order at 3. In reaching its conclusion, the trial court considered Dr. Larson's report. Moreover, during the Faretta hearing, Hauser acknowledged that he had a GED and took two semesters of pre-law college courses.

These subsidiary findings, and the ultimate decision that Hauser is competent, are factual in nature and are entitled to a presumption of correctness. See Demosthenes v. Baal, 495 U.S. 731, 735, 110 S.Ct. 2223, 109 L.Ed.2d 762 (1990) (per curiam); 28 U.S.C. 2254(e)(1). In order to rebut these findings, CCRC and Crawford must present clear and convincing evidence that Hauser is incompetent. They have failed to establish that there is any reasonable likelihood they can do so. For this reason, no "adequate basis exists for the exercise of federal power" in this case. Demosthenes, 495 U.S. at 737, 110 S.Ct. 2223.

The stay must be vacated because the arguments for it are "for all relevant purposes indistinguishable from those we recently rejected," Delo, 509 U.S. at 823, 113 S.Ct. 2922, in Ford II. Binding Eleventh Circuit precedent3 forecloses CCRC and Crawford's request to proceed as next friend. Accordingly, we hold that the district court abused its discretion in failing to vacate the stay, because it is readily apparent that CCRC and Crawford have no standing to proceed on Hauser's behalf.

Based on the foregoing, we vacate the district court's August 22, 2000, order granting a stay of execution.

STAY VACATED.

*****

NOTES:

1

Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975).

2

In an abundance of caution, however, the circuit court appointed attorney Michael A. Flowers as "stand-by" counsel to provide Hauser any legal advice if he so requested.

3

See Lonchar, 978 F.2d 637, Ford II, 195 F.3d 603, and Minerva v. Singletary, 4 F.3d 938 (11th Cir.1993).

 

 

 
 
 
 
home last updates contact