A Jacksonville man is getting off Death Row after a judge ruled the death-penalty phase in his original trial was marred by ineffective work by his trial lawyers.

Senior Circuit Judge Charles Arnold ruled Raymond Curtis Bright, 60, should get a new penalty phase to determine if he belongs on Death Row. But the judge denied a motion from Bright’s lawyers to throw out his two first-degree murder convictions for bludgeoning Randall Brown, 16, and Derrick King III, 20, to death with a hammer.

“We’re grateful that the death sentence was set aside,” said Rick Sichta, Bright’s attorney. “But we’re disappointed that the conviction wasn’t thrown out as well.”

Sichta called the ruling bittersweet.

Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda also expressed disappointment at the ruling and said he thought Bright’s original trial lawyers, Richard Kuritz and James Nolan, did a good job with what they had.

“The evidence was overwhelming to the defendant’s guilt,” de la Rionda said. “He beat two people to death with a hammer and claimed self-defense.”

Arnold’s ruling is likely to create a situation where both sides appeal his decision to the Florida Supreme Court. Prosecutors will likely appeal Arnold’s ruling setting aside the death penalty while lawyers for Bright will appeal his decision denying a new trial.

Bright will remain in prison while the case goes to the Supreme Court.

De la Rionda said if Arnold’s original ruling is upheld by the Supreme Court, they will seek to put him on Death Row again.

That would involve having another jury hear the case and make a recommendation to Arnold on whether Bright should get life in prison without parole or death. Arnold would make the final decision, but judges in Florida almost never put someone on Death Row when a jury recommends life.

If the Supreme Court throws out the verdict along with the death sentence, they will try him again for first-degree murder and will seek the death penalty again, de la Rionda said.

Bright was arrested in 2008 after the bodies of Brown and King were found in Bright’s home. He said he was attacked by the two men in the early morning hours. He wrestled a gun away from Brown and then killed both men in self-defense, he said.

Prosecutors said Bright killed the two men while they were sleeping on a couch and recliner.

Defense attorneys said Brown and King had moved into Bright’s house and were selling drugs, and Bright, who was addicted to cocaine, wanted them out so he could attempt to get clean.

A jury convicted Bright and recommended the death penalty by an 8-4 vote. Arnold sentenced him to death in November 2009, and the conviction and sentence was upheld by the Florida Supreme Court.

Sichta then went back to Circuit Court and asked for a new trial by arguing that Kuritz and Nolan did an insufficient job of representing Bright during his murder trial. Arnold said their performance was acceptable during the murder trial, but not during the penalty phase.

During a hearing to determine whether Bright would get a new trial, Kuritz testified that he was responsible for handling the trial and Nolan was going to handle the penalty phase. But Kuritz said when the penalty phase began, he realized that Nolan was not as prepared as he’d said he was, and he tried to “take over” the penalty phase.

Kuritz said he was surprised no family members of Bright had been interviewed and was also unhappy that a detailed psychological profile of Bright hadn’t been done. He was also unhappy that more investigation wasn’t done into Bright’s history of mental illness and substance abuse.

Nolan died in 2012. De la Rionda said Nolan’s death made it more difficult to argue that Bright received a competent defense because most of the criticisms were focused on Nolan, and he couldn’t defend himself.

Kuritz declined comment Friday.

In his ruling, Arnold said the failure to investigate and present mitigation to the jury was enough to grant Bright a new penalty phase because there’s reason to believe that Bright’s sentence might have been different if more evidence had been submitted.

Sichta argued that similar mistakes during the trial justified throwing the verdict out, but Arnold dismissed those suggestions and said that Kuritz and Nolan made decisions during the actual trial that were based on trial strategy, and not a failure to perform their responsibilities.


Larry Hannan: (904) 359-4470