Caylor v. State
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed Matthew Caylor's death sentence imposed after a new penalty phase, rejecting his claims that the trial court erred in denying his post-hearing motion to withdraw his waivers of a penalty-phase jury and mitigation presentation, and reaffirming that the State need not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that aggravators outweigh mitigators. The court held that Caylor's four-month delay in seeking withdrawal after learning the victim's mother had died supported a finding of bad faith and dilatory intent, and that his ignorance of her death did not render his earlier colloquy-based waiver unknowing or involuntary. The court distinguished Figueroa-Sanabria because no court misstatement of law induced the waiver, and reaffirmed Wells v. State on the burden of proof for the weighing determination.
Key facts
- Matthew Caylor was convicted and sentenced to death; at the penalty phase, he waived his right to a jury and to present mitigation evidence after a full colloquy with the trial court.
- After the penalty phase concluded, Caylor moved to withdraw his waivers upon learning that the victim's mother had died, claiming this changed circumstance made his earlier waiver unknowing and involuntary.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This decision gives practitioners a concrete example of how courts assess bad-faith and delay in penalty-phase waiver withdrawal motions, particularly the significance of a lengthy pre-hearing waffling pattern combined… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.