The Commission on Capital Cases updates thisinformation regularly. This information, however, is subject to changeand may not reflect the latest status of an inmate’s case and should not berelied upon for statistical or legal purposes.
JENNINGS, Bryan F. (W/M)
DC # 073045
DOB: 12/09/58
Eighteenth Judicial Circuit, Brevard County Case, Case #79-773
Sentencing Judge, Trial I: The Honorable Tom Waddell
Sentencing Judge, Resentencing I: The Honorable ClarenceJohnson, Jr.
Sentencing Judge, Resentencing II: The Honorable Charles M.Harris
Attorneys, Trial I: Joan Bickerstaff & Leland Wooten –Assistant Public Defenders
Attorney, Trial II: Stanley R. Andrews – Private
Attorney, Trial III: Vincent W. Howard – Private
Attorneys, Direct Appeal I: James R. Wulchak & MichaelS. Becker – Assistant Public Defenders
Attorney, Direct Appeal II: Christopher S. Quarles –Assistant Public Defender
Attorney, Direct Appeal III: Christopher S. Quarles –Assistant Public Defender
Attorney, Collateral Appeals: Martin McClain –Registry
Date of Offense: 05/11/79
Date of Sentence: 05/07/80
Date of First Resentencing: 09/03/82
Date of Second Resentencing: 04/25/86
Circumstances of Offense:
The nude body of six-year-old Rebecca Kunash was found in aBrevard County canal on May 11, 1979. According to the autopsy report,she suffered a fractured skull. She had been raped and asphyxiation was thefinal cause of death. At trial, the evidence compiled suggested thatBryan Jennings broke into Rebecca’s bedroom and covered her breathing passagesuntil she lost consciousness. Upon exiting the house, Jennings threw thevictim down, causing her head to strike the pavement with enough force tofracture her skull. Jennings then moved the victim to a canal close bywhere he sexually assaulted her before holding her head underwater forapproximately ten minutes.
Shortly after the murder, Jennings was arrested on an OrangeCounty traffic warrant. On May 12, officers awakened Jennings at 1:00a.m. for the purpose of questioning him about Rebecca’s murder. Jenningsindicated that he wanted an attorney after he was read his rights. Theinvestigator further explained Jennings’ rights and said he hoped Jenningswould continue questioning at that time. Jennings decided that he wouldtalk to the investigating officer if he was allowed a brief recess to gatherhis thoughts. Five minutes later, Jennings’ returned and consented toproceed with questioning without his attorney.
During the interrogation, Jennings initially said that hewas not involved in the murder, but when the investigator pressed him, Jenningsmade an incriminating statement. This statement resulted in the policegaining possession of clothing items, hand-drawn maps, and pictures, all ofwhich were later introduced into evidence.
Trial Summary:
05/16/79 Defendantwas indicted as follows:
Count I: Premeditated First-Degree Murder
Count II: FelonyFirst-Degree Murder
Count III: Felony First-DegreeMurder
Count IV: Kidnapping
Count V: Sexual Batteryon victim under 11 years of age
Count VI: Sexual Battery onvictim under 11 years of age
Count VII: Sexual Battery on victim under11 years of age
Count VIII: Burglary with intent to commitsexual battery
Count IX: Aggravated Battery
02/07/80 Defendant found guilty on all counts
02/11/80 The jury voted for a sentence of Death by a vote of 11 to 1
05/07/80 Defendant was sentenced as follows:
Count I: Premeditated First-Degree Murder – Death
Count IV: Kidnapping – Lifesentence
CountV: Sexual Batteryon victim under 11 years of age – Life
sentence
CountVI: Sexual Battery onvictim under 11 years of age – Life
sentence
Count VIII: Burglary with intent to commit sexual battery –Life
sentence
04/08/82 The Florida Supreme Court vacated the convictions and sentences and
remanded the caseto the trial court for a new trial.
Second Trial:
07/15/82 The verdict was as follows:
Count I: PremeditatedFirst-Degree Murder – Guilty
Count IV: Kidnapping – Guilty
CountV: Sexual Battery onvictim under 11 years of age –
Guilty
Count VI: Sexual Battery onvictim under 11 years of age –
Not Guilty
Count VII: Sexual Battery on victim under11 years of age –
Guilty
Count VIII: Burglary with intent to commitsexual battery –
Guilty
07/16/82 Jury recommended Death by a vote of 9 to 3
09/03/82 Defendant was resentenced as follows:
Count I: Premeditated First-Degree Murder – Death
Count IV: Kidnapping – Lifesentence
Count V: Sexual Batteryon victim under 11 years of age –
Life sentence
Count VIII: Burglary with intent to commit sexual battery–
Life sentence
02/25/85 United States Supreme Court vacated judgment and remanded the case to the trial
court for a newtrial
Third Trial:
03/31/86 The verdict was as follows:
CountI: Premeditated First-Degree Murder – Guilty
Count II: FelonyFirst-Degree Murder – Guilty
Count III: Felony First-DegreeMurder – Guilty
Count IV: Kidnapping – Guilty
Count V: Sexual Batteryon victim under 11 years of age –
Guilty
Count VIII: Burglary with intent to commitsexual battery –
Guilty
04/08/86 Jury recommended Death by a vote of 11 to 1
04/25/86 Defendant was resentenced as follows:
Count I: First-Degree Murder – Death
Count IV: Kidnapping – Lifesentence
Count V: Sexual Batteryon victim under 11 years of age –
Life sentence
Count VIII: Burglary with intent to commitsexual battery –
Life sentence
Appeal Summary:
Florida Supreme Court – Direct Appeal
FSC #59,299
413 So. 2d 24
06/02/80 Appeal filed.
04/08/82 Conviction and sentence vacated, case remanded for new trial.
04/30/82 Mandate issued.
Florida Supreme Court – Direct Appeal (after secondtrial)
FSC #62,600
453 So. 2d 1109
09/10/82 Appeal filed.
07/12/84 Conviction and sentence affirmed.
08/16/85 Rehearing denied.
10/02/85 Mandate issued.
U.S. Supreme Court – Petition for Writ of Certiorari
USSC #84-5396
470 U.S. 1002
09/10/84 Petition filed.
02/25/85 Certiorari granted and judgment vacated, case remanded for furtherconsideration
in light of Sheav. Louisiana and Smith v. Illinois.
** Shea v. Louisiana – The rule of Edwards v Arizona, whichstated that once a suspect has invoked the right to counsel, he must initiateany subsequent conversation, was extended to apply to cases on Direct Appeal.
** Smith v. Illinois – Suspect's responses to continuedpolice questioning must cease after the suspect’s initial request for counsel.
Florida Supreme Court – Direct Appeal (on remand)
FSC #62,600
473 So. 2d 204
02/25/85 Case remanded by USSC to FSC.
05/23/85 FSC vacated decision and remanded the case to the trial court for a new trial.
08/16/85 Rehearing denied.
Florida Supreme Court – Direct Appeal (after thirdtrial)
FSC #68,835
512 So. 2d 169
05/29/86 Appeal filed.
08/27/87 Conviction and sentence affirmed.
10/22/87 Rehearing denied.
U.S. Supreme Court – Petition for Writ of Certiorari
USSC #87-6172
484 U.S. 1079
12/24/87 Petition filed.
02/22/88 Petition denied.
Florida Supreme Court – Petition for Writ of HabeasCorpus
FSC #74,926
583 So. 2d 316
10/26/89 Petition filed.
06/13/91 Petition denied.
08/20/91 Rehearing denied.
08/20/91 Mandate issued.
State Circuit Court – 3.850 Motion
CC #79-733
10/23/89 Motion filed.
10/26/89 Motion denied.
01/24/90 Rehearing denied.
Florida Supreme Court – 3.850 Appeal
FSC #75,689
583 So. 2d 316
03/14/90 Appeal filed.
06/13/91 FSC affirmed the circuit court’s denial of the 3.850 with the exception of aChapter 119 public records request, which was granted.
08/20/91 Rehearing denied.
08/20/91 Mandate issued.
State Circuit Court – 3.850 Motion
CC #79-733
01/16/92 Motion filed.
03/18/98 Motion denied.
Florida Supreme Court – 3.850 Appeal
FSC #83,841
651 So.2d 1194
06/13/94 Appeal filed.
12/20/94 Appeal dismissed by the State.
02/01/95 Rehearing denied.
Florida Supreme Court – 3.850 Appeal
FSC #93,056
782 So. 2d 853
05/26/98 Appeal filed.
03/22/01 FSC affirmed circuit court’s denial of 3.850 Motion.
06/04/01 Rehearing denied.
07/05/01 Mandate issued.
U.S. District Court, Northern District – Petition forWrit of Habeas Corpus
USDC# 02-174
392 F.Supp.2d 1312
07/02/02 Petition filed.
09/29/05 USDC denied petition.
Florida Supreme Court – Petition for Writ of HabeasCorpus
FSC# 02-2143
857 So. 2d 196
10/02/02 Petition filed.
06/18/03 Petition denied.
09/08/03 Rehearing denied.
U.S. Supreme Court – Petition for Writ ofCertiorari
USSC# 03-7894
541 U.S. 940
12/08/03 Petition filed.
03/22/04 Petition denied.
State Circuit Court – 3.850 Motion
CC #79-733
03/07/05 Motion filed.
07/18/08 Motion denied.
U.S. Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit – Petition forWrit of Habeas Corpus Appeal
USCA# 05-16363
490 F.3d 1230
11/14/05 Appeal filed.
07/06/07 Denial is affirmed.
09/07/07 Mandate issued.
United States Supreme Court – Petition for Writ ofCertiorari
USSC #07-9002
128 S. Ct. 1762
01/22/08 Petition filed.
03/31/08 Petition denied.
Florida Supreme Court – 3.850 Appeal
FSC# 08-1812
09/22/08 Appeal filed.
02/03/10 Appeal denied.
Circuit Court – 3.850 Motion
CC# 79-733
(Pending)
11/29/10 Motion filed
Death Warrants:
08/29/89 Death warrant signed by Governor Martinez.
10/26/89 Stay granted by the Florida Supreme Court.
Clemency:
05/11/88 Clemency hearing held (denied)
Factors Contributing to the Delay in Imposition ofSentence:
The defendant was tried two additional times after hisinitial sentencing. The second 3.850 Motion took six years from the dateof filing to the date that a decision was rendered. Jennings’ federalHabeas Petition was pending from 07/02/02 – 09/29/05.
Case Information:
A Direct Appeal was filed with the Florida Supreme Court(FSC) on 06/02/80. Issues that were raised on appeal included whether thedefendant was denied the benefit of cross-examination of a vital and materialwitness. The following is an explanation of the events leading up to thedenied cross-examination. Before the commencement of the trial, the stateannounced that it was going to call an inmate named Allen Kruger as awitness. Kruger said that while he was in jail, he overheard Jenningsmake incriminating statements to his cellmate. The assistant publicdefender representing Jennings attempted to withdraw as counsel because Krugerhad also been represented by a public defender. At this point in thepre-trial process, Kruger was awaiting sentencing for his conviction ofSecond-Degree Murder. The trial judge denied the counsel’s request towithdraw, a decision that was upheld by higher courts. At the actualtrial, a sentenced Kruger testified that Jennings confessed to the murder andprovided details, such as how he had beaten and then killed the victim. The public defender representing Jennings refused to cross-examine Kruger,maintaining that to cross-examine the witness would be a violation of the codeof professional responsibility. The trial judge insisted that the publicdefender cross-examine the witness, but he refused and no cross-examination occurred. The FSC agreed that the defendant was denied a fair trial and on 04/08/82, boththe conviction and sentence were vacated and the case was remanded to thecircuit court for a new trial.
Jennings was resentenced on 09/03/82. A second DirectAppeal was filed with the FSC on 09/10/82. Issues that were raised onappeal included whether the trial court erred in allowing admissions made bydefendant pursuant to police interrogation and after proper waiver ofcounsel. On 07/12/84, the FSC affirmed the conviction and sentence ofDeath.
A Petition for Writ of Certiorari was filed with the UnitedStates Supreme Court (USSC) on 09/10/84. The USSC granted Certiorari,vacated judgment, and remanded the case to the FSC for further consideration on02/25/85, in light of Shea v. Louisiana and Smith v. Illinois. Afterfurther consideration, the FSC vacated the decision and remanded the case tothe circuit court for a new trial on 05/23/85, stating that Jennings’confession was now suppressed.
Jennings was resentenced again on 04/25/86. A thirdDirect Appeal was filed on 05/29/86. Issues that were raised on appealincluded whether application of the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrinerequired the suppression of specific photographs taken as a result an illegallyobtained confession. All of the issues raised were found to be eitherharmless or without merit and on 08/27/87, the FSC affirmed the conviction andsentence.
A Petition for the Writ of Certiorari was filed on 12/24/87and denied on 02/22/88.
A Petition for Habeas Corpus was filed with the FSC on10/26/89 and denied on 06/13/91.
A 3.850 Motion was filed with the circuit court on 10/23/89and denied on 10/26/89.
A 3.850 Appeal was filed with the FSC on 03/14/90. Issuesthat were raised included whether the state withheld material, exculpatoryevidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland. The FSC did not find a Bradyviolation; however, they did find merit to the claim that Jennings is entitledto certain portions of the state’s files as public records under Chapter119. In light of the public records request, the 3.850 Appeal was grantedin part and denied in part giving Jennings additional time to file any newBrady claims that might arise from the disclosure of state files.
A 3.850 was filed with the circuit court on 01/16/92 anddenied on 03/18/98.
A 3.850 Appeal was filed with the FSC on 06/13/94 anddismissed on 12/20/94, per the State’s motion that the Appeal was prematurelyfiled.
Another 3.850 Appeal was filed with the FSC on05/26/98. Issues that were raised on appeal included whether the trialcourt erred in denying relief based on appellant’s Brady and Strickland claimsand whether the defendant’s counsel was ineffective. All of the claims weredeemed either harmless or without merit, and the FSC affirmed the circuitcourt’s denial of the 3.850 on 03/22/01.
A Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus was filed with theUnited States District Court, Northern District, on 07/02/02 that was denied on09/29/05.
A Petition for Habeas Corpus was filed with the FSC on10/02/02 and was denied on 06/18/03.
A Petition for Writ of Certiorari was filed with the UnitedStates Supreme Court on 12/08/03 and was denied on 03/22/04.
A 3.850 Motion was filed with the state circuit court on03/07/05. This motion was denied on 07/18/08.
A Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Appeal was filed withthe U.S. Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit, on 11/14/05. On 07/06/07, thiscourt affirmed the lower court’s denial of the writ of certiorari. Amandate was issued on 09/07/07.
A Petition for Writ of Certiorari was filed with the UnitedStates Supreme Court on 01/22/08 and was denied on 03/31/08.
A 3.850 Appeal was filed in the Florida Supreme Court on09/22/08. This appeal was denied on 02/03/10.
A 3.850 Motion was filed with the Circuit Court on11/29/10. This motion is still pending.
Institutional Adjustment:
DATE DAYS VIOLATION LOCATION
12/14/80 30 DISOBEYINGORDER FLORIDA STATE PRISON
08/01/90 30 FIGHTING FLORIDA STATE PRISON
08/02/95 0 UNAUTH USE OFDRUGS UNION C.I.
06/13/01 0 DISRESP.TO OFFICIALS UNION C. I.
________________________________________________________________________
Report Date: 07/16/02 cc
Approved: 07/22/02 ws
Updated: 01/26/11 CAR