Murderpedia has thousands of hours of work behind it. To keep creating
new content, we kindly appreciate any donation you can give to help
the Murderpedia project stay alive. We have many
plans and enthusiasm
to keep expanding and making Murderpedia a better site, but we really
need your help for this. Thank you very much in advance.
Dominick
Anthony OCCHICONE
Classification: Murderer
Characteristics:
Revenge
Number of victims: 2
Date of murders:
June 10,
1986
Date of birth:
August 29,
1945
Victims profile: Raymond
and Martha Artzner(the
parents of his ex-girlfriend)
Sixth Judicial Circuit, Pasco
County Case# 86-1355
Sentencing Judge: The Honorable
Lawrence E. Keough
Attorneys, Trial: Bruce S.
Boyer – Private
Attorney, Direct Appeal:
Douglas S. Conner – Assistant Public Defender
Attorneys, Collateral Appeals:
Peter Cannon & Daphney E. Gaylord – CCRC-M
Date of Offense: 06/10/86
Date of Sentence: 11/09/87
Circumstances of the Offense:
Dominick Occhicone awoke his
former girlfriend, Anita Gerrety, in the early morning hours of
06/10/86, by knocking on the sliding glass door to the bedroom of her
house.
She shared this house with her children as well as her parents,
Raymond and Martha Artzner. Occhicone left when Gerrety refused to
speak to him, but returned an hour or so later armed with a handgun.
Occhicone cut the exterior telephone wires and proceeded to wake the
household. When Raymond Artzner, Gerrety’s father, went outside to
confront him, Occhicone shot him.
Occhicone proceeded to break into the
house through a locked door while Gerrety and her daughter were
attempting to flee from the house. Once he gained entrance into the
house, he shot Gerrety’s mother, Martha Artzner, four times.
Trial Summary:
07/15/86 Indicted as follows:
Count I: First-Degree
Murder (Raymond Artzner)
Count
II: First-Degree Murder (Martha Artzner)
09/18/87 Jury returned guilty verdicts on all counts of the
indictment
09/22/87 Jury recommended death by a vote of 7-5
11/09/87 Sentenced as follows:
Count I: First-Degree
Murder (Raymond Artzner) – Life
Count II: First-Degree Murder (Martha Artzner) – Death
Case Information:
Occhicone filed a Direct Appeal
to the Florida Supreme Court on 11/25/87. Issues that were raised
included whether the trial court erred in not granting his motion for
mistrial based on a spectator’s alleged misconduct, and whether or not
the prosecutor’s comment on his refusal to take the hand swab test
constituted penalizing him for exercising his post-Miranda rights.
The
Florida Supreme Court found all of the claims either without merit or
harmless. The Court affirmed the conviction and death sentence on
10/11/90.
Occhicone filed a Petition for
Writ of Certiorari to the Florida Supreme Court on 03/22/91, which was
denied on 05/20/91.
Occhicone filed a Petition for
Writ of Habeas Corpus to the Florida Supreme Court on 07/30/92, which
was denied on 06/07/93.
Occhicone filed a 3.850 Motion
to the Circuit Court on 05/20/93, which was denied on 05/18/98.
Occhicone filed a 3.850 Appeal
to the Florida Supreme Court on 06/30/98. The Court affirmed the trial
court’s denial of the 3.850 Motion on 06/29/00. Issues that were raised
included whether or not counsel provided ineffective assistance during
both the guilt phase and the penalty phase. The Court denied all
claims.
Occhicone filed a Petition for
Writ of Habeas Corpus to the United States District Court, Middle
District, on 11/13/01. On 03/31/03, the petition was granted in part
and denied in part. The Court concluded that most of Occhicone’s claims
were procedurally barred from review.
On
05/03/05, Occhicone filed a Habeas Appeal to the United States Court of
Appeals. The issue in this case involved an alleged violation of
Giglio focusing on the testimony of Baker, Occhicone’s cellmate in
jail, after the murders of the Artners. The Giglio issue in this
case involved the agreement between the prosecution attorneys and Baker
to testify against Occhicone in exchange for the prosecution’s
recommendation that Baker receive probation on his grand theft charge.
In light of the totality of evidence, the USCA concluded
that there is no reasonable likelihood that the State’s failure to
correct the untruthful testimony of Baker could have affected the
judgment of the jury. On 07/14/06, the USCA affirmed the USDC’s
denial of Occhicone’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus.
