Judicial Circuit, Broward County Case #81-9310CF
The Honorable Leroy H. Moe
Trial: T. Don Tenbrook – Private
Appeal: Michael D. Gelety – Private
Collateral Appeals: Talbot D’Alemberte – Private
On September 5,
1981, Doyle was performing yard work in the yard of Pamela Kipp, Doyle’s
neighbor and third cousin. He later drove his truck which was full of
branches and leaves to a nearby area to unload the debris. Witnesses
reported seeing Kipp jogging in the same area at the same time. The
victim never returned to her home.
During a search, a skeleton later
identified as that of Monica Ruddick was discovered in the area where
Doyle had been dumping leaves. A short while later, Kipp’s body was
found about 200 yards from the area where the defendant had been dumping
Discovered near the body were a carpet and fresh tree
clippings, as well as ruts in the mud where a vehicle had been stuck. Doyle’s truck had been stuck in the mud in the area the day of the
murder before another person helped him pull the vehicle out. An
examination revealed that strangulation was the cause of death and that
the victim was sexually battered while still alive.
In a number of
statements, some of them recorded, Doyle admitted to having sex with
Kipp and killing her. He said he was intoxicated at the time of the
murder and could not remember the details.
It was reported at a
suppression hearing that Doyle had undergone hypnosis in an attempt to
recall additional details of the murder, a session that lasted a hour
and was recorded. Doyle allegedly admitted the Kipp killing, as well as
the Ruddick killing, but later recanted and denied killing Ruddick. However, both the tape of the session and all notes of the session were
lost and never recovered.
a December 12, 1994 clemency board hearing, the governor and cabinet
scheduled this case to be placed on the clemency board agenda in 2020.
Attorneys for Doyle argued he was mentally retarded.
Indicted on the
returned guilty verdicts on all counts of the indictment.
sentencing, the jury, by a vote of 8 to 4, recommended the death sentence for the murder conviction.
sentenced as follows:
First-degree murder – death
Sexual battery – life imprisonment.
Doyle filed a
direct appeal with the Florida Supreme Court on 06/18/82, citing the
following trial court errors: denial of due process due to loss of
evidence, failure to suppress confession, improper comments from the
trial judge that prejudiced the proceedings, and failure to find
mitigating circumstances and improper finding of aggravating
The court affirmed the conviction and sentence on
Doyle filed a 3.850 motion with the trial court, which the court denied
Martinez’s signing of a death warrant on 05/06/88 prompted Doyle to file
three appeals. He first appealed the trial court’s denial of the 3.850
motion to the Florida Supreme Court on 05/23/88, then petitioned the
court for a writ of habeas corpus on 06/06/88. In a consolidated
opinion on 06/23/88, the FSC affirmed the 3.850 denial and denied the
habeas petition. Finally on 06/27/88, Doyle petitioned the U.S.
District Court, Southern District, for a stay of execution and writ of
The district court stayed the execution on 06/29/88, and
in granting habeas on 02/08/89 vacated the sentence and remanded,
claiming that Doyle’s trial counsel was ineffective during the penalty
The State, on
05/25/89, appealed the district court’s ruling to the U.S. Court of
Appeals, 11th Circuit. On 01/14/91, the appeals court
reversed the district court’s ruling and reinstated the death sentence,
saying that Doyle failed to establish that his trial counsel was
ineffective at the sentencing phase. The U.S. Supreme Court denied
certiorari on 10/21/91.
the Florida Supreme Court for a second habeas writ on 09/06/94. He
raised four claims: the jury instruction on the heinous, atrocious or
cruel aggravating (HAC) factor was unconstitutionally vague; appellate
counsel was ineffective for failing to raise the HAC issue on direct
appeal; the trial judge and prosecutor diminished the role of the jury
in sentencing; and the Florida Supreme Court erred on direct appeal when
it failed to engage in a harmless error analysis after striking an
aggravator. The court rejected the claims and denied the petition on
There are no