FREE ANTHONY WINT

0 have signed. Let’s get to 2,500!


CASE HISTORY

 

Anthony Wint was never offered a plea bargain and went to trial. Anthony Wint was never identified by any of the victims or witnesses. Anthony Wint did not match DNA samples produced at trial. Anthony Wint’s finger prints were never matched at the scene of the crime. Anthony Wint, up until the onset of his mental illness, maintained his innocence. Only the testimony of Nelson Baptiste convicted Anthony Wint. The state used a government informant who bartered his compliance with the court to gain leniency.

 Anthony Wint proceeded to a dual-trial with a co-defendant in July 2011, he was convicted on different charges from that which he was arrested or  indicted, and was sentenced to consecutive terms of 45 years imprisonment on all counts of the new charges(John S. Kastrenakes, Judge; L.T. Case NO 2009CF007177CMB).

When Anthony Wint, went to trial he was saddled with even more charges by a biased prosecutor.
Both trial counsel and appellate counsel should have argued that Anthony Wint was convicted of uncharged crimes, where there were no indictment or formal charges through legal procedure.
Anthony was incapable of testifying at trial but prior to the onset of mental illness, had always asserted both his actual and legal innocence. The trial evidence established could not prove otherwise. The trial court sentenced Anthony Wint to 30 years in prison on Count I, followed by 7.5 years on Count II, followed by 7.5 years on Count III.

The arresting officer Detective Turner, who authored the police report as well as the supplementary report that led to Anthony Wint’s indictment by the Grand Jury, was never interviewed, deposed, confronted or cross-examined by Anthony Wint’s Counsel. This is a clear violation of the “Confrontation Clause” guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, United States v. Baptista-Rodriguez, 17 F. 3rd 1354, 1370 (11th Cir. 1994). 

Unlike co-defendant, Nelson Baptiste, Anthony Wint was not aware of the charges being stacked against him or that he was placed in “Double Jeopardy” see 4D14-4100 Nelson Baptiste V. State of Florida. The Double Jeopardy charges that were removed by the state of Florida from co-defendant Nelson Baptiste, for more than three years, are still among Anthony Wint’s arrest and conviction charges. Although Double Jeopardy has been removed from Mr. Baptiste, the charges of which Nelson Baptiste was convicted, the Florida Court system has refused to do the same for Anthony Wint, despite four attempts at sentence reduction.
 (1)   Anthony Wint’s Constitutional rights were violated.

(2)  The trial court is obligated to conduct a competency hearing if there is doubt of mental competence to stand trial, therefore denying Anthony Wint of his Sixth Amendment protection to a fair trial.

(3)   The court committed a constitutional violation by stacking charges.

(4)   The State’s attorney committed prosecutorial misconduct by misrepresenting Anthony Wint’s car as blue when the car is indeed gray, as is registered with the State of Florida Department of Motor vehicle, and by making the jury highly-prejudicial, by using improper and unsubstantiated remarks in closing argument; This violates Ethics as well as Anthony Wint’s Sixth Amendment right to be tried by an impartial jury.

(5)   The State of Florida violated Anthony Wint's Fifth Amendment protection of due process by not preserving the transcripts of the deposition of Isaiah Diaz and Sixth Amendment protection to confront and call witnesses such as Detective Turner, the arresting officer. The concealment of Isaiah Diaz by the Palm Beach Sheriff prevented access to a key witness.

(6) That the State of Florida violated Anthony Wint's Fifth Amendment protection of due process. Although Anthony Wint was not aware of the charges being stacked against him or that he was placed in “Double Jeopardy” see 4D14-4100 Nelson Baptiste V. State of Florida, Counsel was ineffective in protecting his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights.   

(7)  The State of Florida failed to protect Anthony Wint's Fifth Amendment right of due process and Eighth Amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment by failing to physically and mentally protect him while in custody of the state due to retaliation by various state and local employees.

A habeas corpus petition is currently under review in U.S. District Court, Case No. 917CV80631 and Eleventh Circuit Appeal No. 1713459J.

We are asking Governor Ron DeSantis, for an inquiry into the violations of Anthony Wint’s Constitutional Rights. To contact the governor use the information below

Office of Governor Ron DeSantis
State of Florida
The Capitol
400 S. Monroe St.
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0001

(850) 717-9337