Federal Judge Puts Execution of Dailey on Hold in Pinellas Murder
James Dailey was sent to death row for the May 1985 murder of 14-year-old Shelly Boggio, whose nude body was found with multiple stab wounds in Pinellas County.
October 25, 2019 at 01:55 PM
4 minute read
Little more than two weeks before death row inmate James Dailey was scheduled to be executed, a federal judge issued a stay that will keep Dailey alive until at least the end of December.
U.S. District Judge William Jung imposed the stay through Dec. 30 because new attorneys were appointed to represent Dailey on Oct. 1. Jung wrote that the attorneys in the Capital Habeas Unit of the Office of the Federal Public Defender for the Middle District of Florida needed more time to review and make filings in the case.
Gov. Ron DeSantis last month signed a death warrant for Dailey and scheduled the execution for Nov. 7. Dailey was sent to death row in the May 1985 murder of 14-year-old Shelly Boggio, whose nude body was found with multiple stab wounds in Pinellas County.
In the five-page order Wednesday, Jung said the stay would allow time for the new attorneys to file a habeas corpus petition, a legal procedure that generally challenges the constitutionality of a prisoner being incarcerated. Dailey's supporters have scurried in recent weeks to prevent his execution by arguing that he did not commit the murder.
"While this court takes no position on any potential habeas application that Dailey's new counsel might file between now and the due date … — or even if such application would be reviewable on its merits without approval from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals — it is in the interests of a just and fair system for Mr. Dailey's new counsel to have the statutory grant of time to review and present habeas issues to this court," Jung wrote. "Mr. Dailey has been on Death Row since 1987. Staying his execution for 53 days to ensure that Dailey's right to counsel is meaningful is scant prejudice to respondents [the state]."
Dailey, now 73, and another man, Jack Pearcy, were convicted in the murder of Boggio, who had been hitchhiking before her death. Pearcy, now 64, was sentenced to life in prison, while Dailey was sentenced to death.
Along with Jung issuing the stay, Dailey's supporters have made a series of filings at the Florida Supreme Court to try to block the execution. The supporters, including attorneys with the Innocence Project of Florida, argue that Pearcy has confessed to the murder and cleared Dailey of killing Boggio.
DeSantis this week disputed that such arguments should prevent the execution of Dailey.
"The injustice that I see in this case is that he [Pearcy] didn't get the death penalty," DeSantis said. "I mean, he got life in prison. He should have had the death. … This was one of the most gruesome crimes in the history of Pinellas County. You have the family. It was just terrible. So I think the record, to me, is satisfactory. We're willing to listen to things, but this has been litigated over and over and over. So at some point, you need to do justice."
But Seth Miller, executive director of the Innocence Project of Florida, said in an interview with The News Service of Florida that evidence undercuts key pieces of the state's case and points to Dailey's innocence. He said, for example, that Dailey's death sentence was based, in part, on testimony from jailhouse snitches, who were "incentivized" to pin the crime on Dailey.
"The system is not designed to overturn a wrongful conviction. It's designed to preserve a conviction at all costs," Miller said. "How can you go forward to execute someone when the key pieces of evidence used to convict them have been so thoroughly discredited?"
Jung's order granting the stay said he appointed the Capital Habeas Unit of the Office of the Federal Public Defender to represent Dailey after previous attorneys sought to withdraw because of an alleged conflict of interest. The order did not detail that conflict.
The state objected to granting a stay, Jung wrote.
Jim Saunders and Dara Kam report for the News Service of Florida.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
Trending Stories
- 1The Key Moves in the Reshuffling German Legal Market as 2025 Dawns
- 2Social Media Celebrities Clash in $100M Lawsuit
- 3Federal Judge Sets 2026 Admiralty Bench Trial in Baltimore Bridge Collapse Litigation
- 4Trump Media Accuses Purchaser Rep of Extortion, Harassment After Merger
- 5Judge Slashes $2M in Punitive Damages in Sober-Living Harassment Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250