## Facts

- Charles Globe and fellow inmate Andrew D. Busby planned for roughly two weeks to kill an inmate or correctional officer at Columbia Correctional Institution.
- Elton Ard, Busby’s cellmate, was among several targeted inmates because he allegedly harassed Busby.
- Globe made two garrotes from a linen sheet and broken ballpoint pens in advance, intending to strangle a victim.
- On July 3, 2000, Globe entered Ard and Busby’s cell, locked the door, covered the window, and attacked Ard; Globe and Busby strangled Ard with a garrote, and when one broke, Globe used a second garrote to complete the killing.
- Ard pleaded for his life and offered money; Globe refused and continued the strangulation, then watched Ard gasp before dying.
- Globe staged the scene by placing a cigarette in Ard’s mouth and a lighter in his hand, and was found in the cell during a later count with visible abrasions on his face.
- A medical examiner determined Ard died by strangulation and ruled the death a homicide.
- After the killing, Globe was advised of Miranda rights and declined to make a statement; the interview ended immediately.
- About seven hours later, an officer asked whether Globe wanted to talk after overhearing him speaking with Busby; Globe agreed to speak if Busby was present, received fresh Miranda warnings, and confessed.
- After a later transfer, Globe was again Mirandized and gave a more detailed account of planning and execution.
- Globe moved to suppress the statements as obtained after invocation of the right to remain silent; the trial court denied suppression and admitted the statements at trial.

## Issues

1. Whether Globe’s confessions were inadmissible because officers reinitiated questioning approximately seven hours after Globe invoked his right to remain silent.
2. Whether the evidence was sufficient to support premeditated first-degree murder.
3. Whether the death sentence was legally valid and proportionate given the aggravating and mitigating circumstances.

## Decision

- The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for first-degree murder and the death sentence.
- The court held Globe’s statements were admissible because his right to silence was “scrupulously honored” under Michigan v. Mosley.
- The court found sufficient evidence of premeditation based on advance planning, fabrication of garrotes, selection of targets, and the manner of killing.
- The court upheld the death sentence after weighing aggravation and mitigation and conducting proportionality review.

## Legal Principles

- After a suspect invokes the right to remain silent, later interrogation may be permissible if the right is “scrupulously honored,” including immediate cessation of questioning, a meaningful break in time, and renewed Miranda warnings (Michigan v. Mosley).
- Voluntariness is assessed from the totality of circumstances, including whether later questioning reflects coercive persistence or a choice by the accused to speak after renewed warnings.
- Premeditation may be proven by evidence of advance planning, preparation of instruments to kill, and conduct during and after the killing.
- In capital cases, appellate review includes evaluation of aggravating and mitigating circumstances and proportionality of the death sentence compared to similar cases.

## Conclusion

The Florida Supreme Court upheld Globe’s murder conviction and death sentence, concluding that renewed questioning after a seven-hour break with fresh Miranda warnings did not violate the right to remain silent because officers immediately stopped the first interview and later obtained voluntary statements consistent with Mosley.


Globe v. State, 877 So. 2d 663 (Fla. 2004)