The Commission on Capital Cases updates thisinformation regularly.  This information; however, is subject to change and maynot reflect the latest status of an inmate’s case and should not be relied uponfor statistical or legal purposes. 

Lindsey, Herman (B/M)

DC# 185502

DOB: 12/29/72

17th Judicial Circuit, Broward County Case # 06-04260

Sentencing Judge: The Honorable Bernard Bober

Attorney, Trial: Christopher Pole – Public Defender’s Office

Attorney, Direct Appeal: Jeffrey L. Anderson – PublicDefender’s Office

Attorney, Collateral Appeals: N/A

Date of Offense: 04/19/94

Date of Sentence: 06/19/07

Date of Release: 07/28/09      

Circumstances of Offense:

On 04/19/94 around 9:30 a.m., the owner of the Big Dollarpawn shop, Gerald Singer, called Joanne Mazollo, an employee of the pawn shop,to make sure she was at the store and doing well. He also called several timesan hour later, but no one answered the phone. Singer then went to the pawn shopto check on Mazollo and found her body sitting in a chair in the back room.According to the medical examiner, she died instantly from a gunshot wound tothe head. Her death occurred during a robbery of the pawn shop. Singer reportedthat between five and seven firearms, fifty envelopes of jewelry, and a bluevelvet Crown Royal bag filled with jewelry were missing; the cash drawer wasempty as well.

Over a decade later,Herman Lindsey was sentenced to death for Mazollo’s murder on 06/19/07. Priorto the sentencing, during October of 1995, Lindsey made a statement to thepolice claiming he had been in the store before the crime occurred to pawn hisSega under a false name, but said he never took part in the robbery. He also implicated Ronnie LoRay for the murder ofMazollo. LoRay was an acquaintance who he had helped get rid of stolen goods inthe past. Lindsey said LoRay came over to his house on the day of the robberyto tell him about it, and LoRay said he heard a shot, but did not know if thewoman had died. According to Lindsey, LoRay had gold jewelry in his pockets, afew hundred dollars, and a gun.

At the trial, Lindsey’sex-wife, Demeatres Gause (also known as “Nikki”), said Lindsey was not in theapartment, where they stayed on occasion, between 10:30 a.m. and 11:00 a.m.;however, she mentioned that he might have been downstairs. Both Lindsey andLoRay were in the apartment before noon. During the twelve o’clock news report,Lindsey asked Nikki to turn up the volume on the television, so he could hearthe report about the Big Dollar pawn shop robbery. Nikki found a Crown RoyalBag filled with jewelry in a closet in the apartment sometime later. Lindseysold it and never mentioned how he acquired it. Also, a close friend ofNikki’s, Alfonzer Harrold, testified that LoRay was wearing a new bracelet theday after the robbery occurred. Evidence showed that LoRay’s fingerprint wasfound on a stun gun box that was located in the back room of the pawn shop nextto the safe. Lindsey’s thumbprint was found on a pawnshop receipt that was signed by David Ashley—the name Lindsey usedto pawn his Sega.

Codefendant Information:

LoRay was convicted ofsecond-degree murder for Mazollo’s death.

Prior Incarceration History in the State of Florida:

Community Supervision History in the State of Florida:

Trial Summary:

03/08/06          Indictedas follows:

                                    CountI:           First-Degree Murder (Joanne Mazollo)

                                    CountII:         Soliciting to Commit Armed Robbery

10/05/06          Juryreturned guilty verdicts on Count I; Count II was disposed nolle prosequi

10/05/06          Juryrecommended death by a vote of 8-4

06/19/07          Sentencedas follows:

                                    CountI:           First-Degree Murder (Joanne Mazollo) – Death

Appeal Summary:

Florida Supreme Court – Direct Appeal

FSC# 07-1167

06/25/07          DirectAppeal filed

05/05/09          OralArguments held

07/09/09          FSCreversed the conviction and sentence and directed that an acquittal be entered

07/27/09          Mandateissued

Case Information:

Lindsey filed a DirectAppeal to the Florida Supreme Court on 06/25/07. He raised the following 18issues on appeal: (1) the trial court erred in admitting irrelevant testimony;(2) the trial court erred in denying Lindsey’s motion for judgment ofacquittal; (3) the trial court erred in allowing a witness to testify that thevictim knew Lindsey; (4) the trial court erred in allowing the State to redacta portion of Lindsey’s statements; (5) the trial court erred in admittingevidence that Lindsey had been in jail; (6) the trial court erred in denyingLindsey’s motion to dismiss the indictment; (7) the trial court erred in admittingan autopsy photo into evidence; (8) trial court erred in sending unrequestedevidence to the jury; (9) the trial court erred in denying Lindsey’s requestfor a new trial; (10) the trial court erred in finding the avoid-arrestaggravator; (11) the trial court erred in denying Lindsey’s request for aspecial jury instruction; (12) the trial court erred in instructing the jury onthe avoid-arrest aggravator; (13) the death sentence is not proportionate tothe crime; (14) the trial court erred in allowing the prosecution to questionLindsey about guilt phase issues during the penalty phase; (15) the trial courterred in allowing the prosecution to impeach Curtis Fox; (16) the trial courterred in giving great weight to the jury’s recommendation of the death sentence;(17) Florida’s death penalty law is unconstitutional, and (18) Florida’sfelony-murder aggravator is unconstitutional. On 07/09/09, the Florida SupremeCourt reversed the conviction and sentence and directed that an acquittal beentered. A mandate was issued on 07/27/09.

Prosecution Statements:

David Frankel, who is from the State Attorney’s Office and was theprosecuting attorney on the Herman Lindsey case, made the following comments:

The opinion of the Fla. Supreme Courtnot-with-standing I doubt anyone connected with this case would argue loudlyfor Mr. Lindsey's actual innocence and deny that he got away with murder. Theevidence while compelling was indeed circumstantial. This seems to frightenappellate courts in general and in this instance, the Fla. Supreme Court inparticular.

As it pertains to actual "innocence" I amcertain that neither defense attorney, Christopher Pole or Thomas Cazel willsuggest that the prosecution of the case was: "In bad faith," a"rush to judgment," based on an incomplete investigation, myopic, oranything else of similar nature. Simply put Mr. Lindsey's"exoneration" by the state's high court was based on two clearweaknesses in our system of justice. The first is that this system neithertrusts in, nor is greatly concerned whether someone actually committed thecrime, but only whether it can be proven. And I mean that to include all sides,the defense, the court, and on rare and deviant occasions the prosecution.Ironically, of the three interests it is the prosecution who bears the greatestresponsibility to consider the actual innocence of the accused.

The second is the false belief that any appellatecourt can recreate the issues presented at a trial from a printed record.Appellate review should be the hallmark of restraint. Whether it’s our egoicnature, or need to fill any space we can with our opinions, the Florida SupremeCourt opinion in State of Florida v. Herman Lindsey said nothing about thebrutal murder of Joanne Mozzola.

Defense Statement:

In a conversation withChristopher Pole, Lindsey’s trial attorney, he expressed the followingcomments:

Initially,he did not understand why the prosecutors would go forward with the case. Hehad always felt that there was insufficient evidence to convict Lindsey. He wasshocked when the jury did not acquit Lindsey, and the judge affirmed the deathsentence.

Current Status:

On 07/28/09, Lindsey wasreleased from Florida State Prison.

________________________________________________________________________

Report Date:   04/05/10          EMJ

Approved:       04/05/10          RM

Updated:         04/06/10          EMJ