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. 

WATERHOUSE, Robert Brian (W/M)

DC #   075376                   

DOB:   12/16/46

Sixth Judicial Circuit, Pinellas County, Case #80-192

Sentencing Judge: The Honorable Robert Beach

Resentencing Judge: The Honorable Robert Beach

Attorneys, Trial: Paul Scherer & John Thor White –Assistant Public Defenders

Attorney, Resentencing: Larry Hoffman, Esq.

Attorney, Direct Appeal: Philip J. Padovano, Esq.

Attorney, Direct Appeal, Resentencing: Steven Bright, Esq.& Clive Stafford Smith, Esq.

Attorney, Collateral Appeals: Robert Norgard – Registry

Date of Offense: 01/02/80

Date of Sentence: 09/03/80

Date of Resentence: 04/11/90

Circumstances of Offense:

On the morning of 01/03/80, St. Petersburg police respondedto a call that the nude body of an unidentified woman had been found in the mudflats of Tampa Bay.  There was evidence that the woman had been draggedfrom a grassy area on shore into the water at high tide.  An examinationof the body revealed severe lacerations on the head and rectum, and bruising onthe throat.  Medical examiners determined that drowning was ultimately thecause of death.  Additionally, there was an adequate amount of acidphosphotase found in the woman’s rectum to suggest the presence of semen. The lacerations in her rectum were determined to be cause by the insertion of alarge object.

Unable to identify the body of the woman, St. Petersburgpolice turned to the public for help.  An anonymous caller gave police ofthe license plate number of Robert Waterhouse and suggested that they shouldinvestigate him.  The body of the woman was identified as Deborah Kammererby her neighbors, Yohan Wenz and Carol Byers.  Wenz and Byers reportedthat on the evening of 01/02/80 they accompanied Kammerer to the ABCLounge.  They later left the lounge, while Kammerer stayed behind. Kyoe Ginn, a bartender at the ABC Lounge, testified that he saw Kammerertalking to Robert Waterhouse and that the two left the lounge together around1:00 a.m.

On the evening of 01/07/80, Robert Waterhouse was asked togo to the police station voluntarily for questioning.  Waterhouse told theinvestigators that he did not know the victim and did not leave the bar with awoman.  Waterhouse was permitted to leave the police station, but his carwas impounded with a search warrant.  A search of his car revealedbloodstains and a luminol test showed that more blood had been wiped up.  Theblood found in the car was consistent with the blood type of Kammerer andinconsistent with the blood type of Waterhouse.  Additionally,investigators found strands of hair that were similar in characteristic to thesamples taken from Kammerer.  There were also fibers in the car thatmatched fibers from the Kammerer’s coat and pants.

Waterhouse was arrested on 01/09/80 for the murder ofDeborah Kammerer.  During a subsequent interrogation, Waterhouse was showna picture of Kammerer and admitted that he did, in fact, know her.

Additional Information:

In 1966, Robert Waterhouse was indicted on charges ofFirst-Degree Murder and Burglary in New York.  He was charged withbreaking into a home and killing 77-year-old Ella Carter.  Waterhouse pledguilty to Second-Degree Murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment.  Hewas on lifetime parole at the time of the Kammerer murder.

Trial Summary:

01/31/80          Defendant indicted on the following:

                                    Count I:           First-DegreeMurder

09/02/80          The jury found the defendant guilty ofFirst-Degree Murder.

09/03/80          Upon advisory sentencing, the jury, by a12 to 0 majority, voted for the

death penalty forthe murder of Deborah Kammerer.

09/03/80          The defendant was sentenced as follows:

                                    Count I:           First-DegreeMurder - Death

02/11/88          TheFlorida Supreme Court granted Waterhouse’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpusand remanded for a new penalty phase consistent with the dictates of Lockett[1] and Hitchcock[2].

03/21/90          Uponadvisory sentencing, the new jury, by a 12 to 0 majority, voted for theimposition of the death penalty.

04/11/90          The defendant was resentenced as follows:

                        Count I:           First-DegreeMurder - Death

Appeal Summary:

Florida Supreme Court – Direct Appeal

FSC #59,765

429 So.2d 301

10/08/80         Appeal filed.

02/17/83         FSC affirmed the conviction and sentence of death.

04/27/83         Rehearing denied.

06/03/83         Mandate issued.

U.S. Supreme Court – Petition for Writ of Certiorari

USSC #83-5567

464 U.S. 977

07/29/83         Petition filed.

11/07/83         Petition denied.

State Circuit Court – Application for Stay ofExecution

CC #80-192

03/15/85         Application filed.

03/15/85         Application granted.

Florida Supreme Court – Motion to Vacate Stay ofExecution (Filed by State)

FSC #66,725

466 So. 2d 218

03/17/85         Motion filed.

03/18/85         Motion denied.

State Circuit Court – 3.850 Motion

CC #80-192

04/22/85         Motion filed.

07/09/86         Motion denied.

Florida Supreme Court – 3.850 Appeal

FSC #69,557

522 So.2d 341

10/31/86         Appeal filed.

02/11/88         In a consolidated opinion with Waterhouse’s Petition for Writ of Habeas

Corpus, FSCaffirmed the denial of Waterhouse’s 3.850 Motion.

Florida Supreme Court – Petition for Writ of HabeasCorpus

FSC #70,459

522 So. 2d 341

04/30/87          Petition filed.

02/11/88          In a consolidated opinion withWaterhouse’s 3.850 Appeal, FSC granted

the Petition for Writ of HabeasCorpus and remanded for a new penalty proceeding consistent with the dictatesof Lockett and Hitchcock.

U.S. Supreme Court – Petition for Writ of Certiorari

USSC #87-7328

488 U.S. 846

06/27/88         Petition filed.

10/03/88         Petition denied.

Florida Supreme Court – Direct Appeal (Resentencing)

FSC #76,128

596 So. 2d 1008

06/08/90         Appeal filed.

02/20/92         FSC affirmed the conviction and sentence of death.

05/07/92         Rehearing denied.

06/08/92         Mandate issued.

Florida Supreme Court – Petition for Writ of HabeasCorpus and Motion for Extraordinary Relief

FSC #77,106

581 So. 2d 1311

12/20/90         Petition and motion filed.

04/18/91         Petition and motion denied.

United States Supreme Court – Petition for Writ ofCertiorari

USSC #92-5354

506 U.S. 957

08/03/92         Petition filed.

11/02/92         Petition denied.

State Circuit Court – 3.850 Motion

CC #80-192

11/01/94         Motion filed.

01/22/98         Motion denied.

Florida Supreme Court – 3.850 Appeal

FSC #95,103

792 So. 2d 1176

03/15/99         Appeal filed.

05/31/01         FSC affirmed the denial of Waterhouse’s 3.850 Motion.

08/23/01         Rehearing denied.

09/24/01         Mandate issued.

Florida Supreme Court – Petition for Writ of HabeasCorpus

FSC #SC01-2845

838 So.2d 480

12/26/01         Petition filed.

11/21/02         Petition denied.

State Circuit Court – 3.853 Motion

CC #80-00192

09/30/03         Motion filed.

02/11/05         Evidentiary hearing held.

04/15/05         Evidentiary hearing held.

07/06/05         CC denied motion.

Florida Supreme Court – 3.853 Motion Appeal

FSC# 05-1404

942 So.2d 414

08/10/05         Appeal filed.

10/13/06         FSC affirmed denial of motion

Warrants:

02/22/85          Death warrant signed by Governor BobGraham.

03/19/85          Execution set.

03/15/85          Stay of Execution granted by the StateCircuit Court.

Clemency:

11/26/84          Clemency hearing held (denied).

Factors Contributing to the Delay in Imposition of theSentence:

Waterhouse’s case was first delayed in 1988, when the FloridaSupreme Court granted his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and remanded forresentencing.  Waterhouse was again sentenced to death and began thecapital appellate process over again.  Waterhouse’s 3.850 Motion waspending for over 3.5 years before finally reaching a disposition in 1998. 

Case Information:

On 10/08/80, Waterhouse filed his Direct Appeal in theFlorida Supreme Court.  Waterhouse claimed that the trial court erred whenit denied his motion to suppress statements he made on 01/07/80. Waterhouse argued that the statements were the result of an illegal arrest;however, it was noted that Waterhouse was not under arrest at that time andwent to the police station voluntarily for questioning.  Waterhouse alsoargued the admission of his statements made to police on 01/09/80 and01/10/80.  He contended that the statements were inadmissible because theywere obtained after his request for an attorney.  Additionally, he arguedthat the officers violated his Fifth Amendment right by questioning him afterhe had invoked his right to consult an attorney.  Waterhouse also claimedthat the trial court erred in admitting irrelevant testimony of a jailhousecellmate and in its consideration and application of mitigatingcircumstances.  The Florida Supreme Court found no merit in Waterhouse’sclaims and affirmed his conviction and sentence of death on 02/17/83.

On 07/29/83, Waterhouse filed a Petition for Writ ofCertiorari in the United States Supreme Court, which was subsequently denied on11/07/83.

On 02/22/85, Governor Bob Graham signed a death warrant forWaterhouse and set the execution date for 03/19/85.  On 03/15/85,Waterhouse filed an Application for Stay of Execution in the State CircuitCourt, which was granted on 03/15/85, pending the resolution of Waterhouse’s3.850 Motion.  The State responded by filing a Motion to Vacate the Stayof Execution.  That was denied on 03/18/85.

Waterhouse filed his 3.850 Motion on 04/22/85, and it wasdenied on 07/09/86.  He then filed an appeal of that denial in the FloridaSupreme Court on 10/31/86.  In a consolidated opinion with Waterhouse’sPetition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, which was filed on 04/30/87, the FloridaSupreme Court affirmed the denial of the 3.850 Motion, but granted the Habeasrelief on 02/11/88.  The Florida Supreme Court remanded Waterhouse’s casefor a new penalty phase consistent with the dictates of Lockett and Hitchcock,which concern the consideration of mitigating evidence.

The State then filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari inthe United States Supreme Court, which was subsequently denied on 10/03/88.

Waterhouse was again sentenced to death on 04/11/90. He then filed a Direct Appeal in the Florida Supreme Court on 06/08/90. In that appeal, he argued that he was denied the right to counsel by hislawyer’s refusal to make a closing argument at the resentencing hearing. Waterhouse also claimed that the trial court erred in refusing to answer twoquestions raised by the jury and in allowing the State to improperly introduceevidence regarding his prior Second-Degree Murder conviction in New York. Waterhouse further contended that the trial court erred in its application ofthe “committed for the purpose of avoiding arrest” and “cold, calculated, andpremeditated” aggravating factors.  The Florida Supreme Court agreed;however, they noted that even by eliminating these two aggravating factors, thepresence of other aggravators and the lack of evidence in mitigation would havestill resulted in a sentence of death.  The Florida Supreme Court affirmedthe sentence of death on 02/20/92.

After filing his Direct Appeal, but before its disposition,Waterhouse filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and a Motion forExtraordinary Relief in the Florida Supreme Court.  The Habeas and theMotion for Relief were denied on 04/18/91.

Waterhouse next filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari inthe United States Supreme Court, which was denied on 11/02/92.

Waterhouse again filed a 3.850 Motion in the State CircuitCourt.  Following the denial of that motion, Waterhouse filed a 3.850Appeal in the Florida Supreme Court.  The court found no merit in theclaims raised by Waterhouse and affirmed the denial of his 3.850 Motion on05/31/01.

Next, Waterhouse filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpusin the Florida Supreme Court that was denied on 11/21/02.

On 09/30/03, Waterhouse filed a 3.853 Motion for DNA Testingin the State Circuit Court.  On 07/06/05, the court issued an orderdenying Waterhouse’s Motion for Post Conviction DNA Testing.

Waterhouse filed a 3.853 Appeal in the Florida Supreme Courton 08/10/05.  On 10/13/06, the FSC affirmed the denial of the motion.

Institutional Adjustment: 

DATE             DAYS             VIOLATION                                     LOCATION        

--------                ----                 ----------------------------           -------------------  

12/14/80            30                  DISOBEYING ORDER                    FSP

02/08/83             0                   DISORDERLYCONDUCT             CENTRAL      

08/25/84            15                  DISORDERLY CONDUCT             NEWRIVER

05/22/85             0                   DISOBEYINGORDER                    FSP

04/17/86            15                  DISRESP.TO OFFICIALS               FSP

01/05/95             0                   UNAUTH USE OF DRUGS             UNIONC. I.          

________________________________________________________________

Reported         08/07/02          EW

Approved        08/08/02          WS

Updated          01/22/09          AEH