Harrel Franklin Braddy v. State of Florida — Pariente, J., Dissenting

Summary

Justice Pariente, dissenting, would reverse for a new penalty phase because the prosecutor repeatedly made improper arguments that denigrated defense counsel and mitigation, appealed to emotion, invoked future dangerousness, vouched for the State's decision to seek death, and characterized a life recommendation as the easy option. She would review the preserved and unpreserved errors under different standards and conclude that their cumulative effect deprived Braddy of a fair penalty-phase proceeding. Justice Quince, dissenting and joined by Justice Pariente, would also reverse for a new guilt-phase trial because the confession and other statements were obtained after police failed to honor Braddy's invocation of his right to remain silent.