Filing # 76547157 E-Filed 08/16/2018 12:36:11 PM

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH

JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR ORANGE
COUNTY, FLORIDA

CASE NUMBERS: 2016 CF 15738 A O

STATE OF FLORIDA,
Plaintiff,
vs.

MARKEITH LOYD,
Defendant.
/

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO STRIKE STATE’S NOTICE OF INTENT

TO OFFER EVIDENCE OF OTHER CRIMES, WRONGS, OR ACTS, OR
INEXTRICABLY INTERTWINED EVIDENCE

COMES NOW the Defendant, MARKEITH LOYD, by and through undersigned counsel,

and moves this Honorable Court to Strike the State’s Notice of Intent to Offer Evidence of Other

Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts, or Inextricably Intertwined Evidence, and as cause therefor would state

unto the Court:

1. The instant case involves criminal acts which are alleged to have been committed by Mr.

Loyd, on December 13, 2016. Among other lesser offenses, Mr. Loyd is accused herein

of using a firearm to kill Sade Dixon and her unborn child, and to shoot Ms. Dixon’s

brother, Ronald Stewart.

2. Nearly one month after the offense alleged herein, on January 9, 2017, Mr. Loyd is

accused of killing Sgt. Deborah Clayton with a firearm in case number 2017- CF-000826.

3. The firearm that was alleged to have been used during both these events was recovered

from Mr. Loyd when he was arrested more than a week later (on January 17, 2017).

4. The State’s Notice of Intent demonstrates that the State intends to introduce the facts from

the Clayton case (2017- CF-000826) during the instant case.

5. The admissibility of similar fact evidence of other crimes, wrongs or acts, also known as

Williams Rule evidence, is codified in § 90.404, Fla. Stat. (2018). See also, Williams v.

State, 110 So.2d 654 (Fla.1959).

6. Fla. Stat. § 90.404(2)(a), provides that:

“Similar fact evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is admissible when relevant to
prove a material fact in issue, including, but not limited to, proof of motive,
opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or
accident, but it is inadmissible when the evidence is relevant solely to prove bad
character or propensity.” Id.

7. The Florida Supreme Court has explained that Williams Rule evidence “involve[s] either

prior crimes against the same victim as the charged offense, or the charged offenses and

the prior offences involve[] similar completed crimes of violence.” Billie v. State, 863

So.2d 323, 329 (Fla. 2003), citing Robertson v. State, 829 So.2d 901, 910 (Fla.2002)

(emphasis supplied).

8. The evidence the State is seeking to introduce in the instant case, to wit, the subsequent

killing of Sgt. Deborah Clayton, is not evidence of a prior similar crime of violence and

thus the evidence is not proper Williams rule evidence.

9. The evidence the State is seeking to introduce in the instant case, to wit, the subsequent

killing of Sgt. Deborah Clayton, does not establish proof of motive, opportunity, intent,

preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident in the instant

case and thus the evidence is not proper Williams rule evidence.

10. Further, the subsequent killing of Sgt. Clayton during an unsuccessful attempt to

apprehend Mr. Loyd, having occurred nearly a month after the events in the instant case,

are not “inextricably intertwined” with the facts in the instant case.
 11. Instead, the evidence of Sgt. Clayton’s killing that the State is seeking to introduce in this

case is being offered solely to prove bad character or propensity of Mr. Loyd, in violation

of the Florida Rules of Evidence and Fla. Stat. 90.404(2)(a).

WHEREFORE, Mr. Loyd respectfully requests this Honorable Court enter its Order

STRIKING the State’s Notice to Offer Evidence of Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts, or Inextricably

Intertwined Evidence or, in the alternative, an Order determining that the facts in the Clayton case

(2017-CF-000826) are inadmissible in the instant case.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Defendant’s Motion
To Strike State’s Notice Of Intent To Offer Evidence Of Other Crimes, Wrongs, Or Acts, Or
Inextricably Intertwined Evidence was provided via E-Service to the Office of the State Attorney
this 16TH day of August 2018.

/S/Teodoro Marrero, Jr., Esquire

Florida Bar No. 818127
tmarrero@mrlawfl.com
MARRERO LAW FIRM, P.A.
100 South Orange Avenue
Suite 300
Orlando, Florida 32801
407.459.1226
FAX 407.915.4137
Attorney for the Defendant

/S/Terence Lenamon, Esquire

Florida Bar No. 0970476
Law Offices of Terence M. Lenamon P.A.
245 SE 1st Street
Suite 404
Miami, FL 33131
305-373-9911
Attorney for the Defendant