Prior to trial, on February 11, 1999, Slater’s defense counsel filed a notice of alibi disclosing that at the time of the charged offenses the defendant was at Singh’s Paint and Body shop and that the defendant intended to call Mickey Singh to be a witness in support of this alibi.  Later, on March 26, 1999 defense counsel filed a notice of a supplemental defense witness, Shemona Conley.  Slater proceeded to trial by jury on May 5-6, 1999 before the Honorable J. Lewis Hall, Circuit Court Judge. Slater was represented by retained counsel, Barry Apfelbaum.  No alibi witness was presented and neither Singh nor Conley testified. Slater also, did not testify at trial in his own defense. 

Prior to trial the state orally moved under Florida Statutes, § 960.01, asking that the victim-witness, Ms. Anderson, be allowed to remain in the courtroom throughout the trial even though she was going to be the key state witness.  The defense objected, pointing out that it would prejudice the defendant to have the only eyewitness present during opening statement, but its objection was overruled.  Ms. Anderson, the victim, was allowed to sit in the courtroom throughout the trial , and as a result, the defense waived its opening statement.

Although the trial court stated "And your objection to that is preserved for any appellate review..." , the objection was made prior to trial, and in fact this pretrial objection, even given the trial court’s statement, did not preserve the matter for appellate review. See Slater v. State, 769 So.2d 512 (Fla. 5thDCA 2000). The Fifth District Court of Appeals expressly held that the error was not preserved for appellate review.

The state dropped three of the four burglary counts on May 6, 1999.  Slater was convicted on all remaining counts. 

On August 13, 1999 Slater was sentenced to life imprisonment on count one and to various concurrent terms of imprisonment on the remaining counts.

Slater pursued a direct appeal to the Fifth District Court of Appeal. Slater was represented by retained counsel, Mark S. Blechman, on his direct appeal. His convictions and sentences were affirmed on appeal. Slater v. State, 769 So.2d 512 (Fla. 5^th DCA 2000).

On June 14, 2001 Slater filed a petition with the Fifth District Court of Appeal alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, case number 5D01-1792. That petition was denied on September 26, 2001. 

Slater filed a 3.850 motion at the circuit court, Ninth Judicial Circuit, Orlando, Orange County, Florida on November 20, 2001. Slater filed an amendment to that motion on August 2, 2002. On August 20, 2002, the circuit court granted an evidentiary hearing on one ground only, issue nine of the original motion (issue two of the amended motion - relating to his decision to not testify and the ineffective assistance of counsel rendered by his trial counsel in advising him not to testify), and reserved ruling on the remaining issues.

Slater was returned from prison for the evidentiary hearing which was originally set for October 3, 2002. The record is silent why the evidentiary hearing was not conducted on the scheduled date, or why and by what notice, if any, the hearing was rescheduled for October 28, 2002, but the record shows that Slater was brought to court on October 28, 2002, without counsel, and the court insisted on conducting the evidentiary hearing on that day and at that time even thought Slater insisted he had retained counsel, Roger Weeden, but that neither he nor his counsel had been notified that the hearing would be that day.

At the conclusion of the October 28, 2002 hearing the court reserved ruling.

Thereafter on January 15, 2003 attorney Roger Weeden, the attorney whom Slater had told the court was representing him when the court refused to continue the evidentiary hearing to give notice to Weeden and to allow Slater to be represented by Weeden at the evidentiary hearing, filed a Stipulation for Substitution of Counsel, whereby he agreed to be replaced as counsel for Slater by Mark A. Fromang, Esq. Then on January 24, 2003 attorney J. Edwin Mills substituted for attorney Fromang. 

On February 20, 2003 a supplemental evidentiary hearing was conducted at which Slater was represented by attorney Mills. At this hearing, contrary to the trial court’s original order limiting the evidentiary hearing to the issue of Slater’s decision to testify or not, evidence was also taken on the alibi issue. Mickey Singh, Slater’s employer at the time of the alleged offenses, testified that he had been contacted by Slater’s trial attorney, Apfelbaum, prior to trial, and he told Apfelbaum that Slater had been at work all day the day of the alleged crime. He asked Apfelbaum if he would be called as a witness, and he did not know why, but Apfelbaum told him he would probably not be called as a witness since all he had to offer was character testimony.

On March 19, 2003 Judge Stan Strickland, who had presided over the evidentiary hearings on the 3.850 motion, entered an order denying the motion.

Slater then retained William Mallory Kent, Esq. who filed his notice of appearance and filed a timely motion for rehearing docketed April 3, 2003. The trial court denied the motion for rehearing by order dated August 13, 2003 and rendered August 14, 2003. Slater filed his notice of appeal of the denial of his 3.850 motion and the order denying his motion for rehearing, on September 8, 2003. That appeal proceeded in a timely fashion thereafter, resulting in oral argument as a showcase appeal for the 2004 Fifth District Court of Appeal Law Day ceremony, but resulted in a per curiam affirmance without written opinion and a denial of rehearing without written opinion on July 23, 2004.

Slater through his counsel, William Kent, then filed a timely federal habeas corpus proceeding in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Orlando Division, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on October 4, 2004. The case was assigned to Magistrate Judge Karla Spaulding and United States District Court Judge Gregory A. Presnell. The state was represented by Assistant Attorney General Rebecca Roark Wall.

The federal District Court denied relief without any hearing, evidentiary or otherwise, on October 26, 2006. Slater, through his counsel William Kent, filed a notice of appeal and request for certificate of appealability seeking to appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in Atlanta. The federal district judge denied Slater’s request to appeal, finding the habeas did not meet the federal standard to permit an appeal.

Slater through counsel William Kent, challenged that finding at the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, which granted Slater a certificate of appealablity and allowed his appeal to go forward, however the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals also ultimately denied Slater relief on narrow, technical grounds December 20, 2007, in an opinion joined in by Judges Anderson, Dubina and Hull. Slater, through his counsel William Kent, petitioned for rehearing, but rehearing was denied February 15, 2008.

Slater, still represented by William Kent, petitioned the United States Supreme Court for certiorari on March 15, 2008, but the Supreme Court declined to review the case by an order entered October 6, 2008.

At that point, Willie Lee Slater had exhausted all his legal remedies. It appeared that he was doomed to spend the rest of his life in Florida State Prison for a crime he did not commit.

But while in Franklin Correctional Institution Mr. Slater was approached by another inmate who told Mr. Slater that he had to get something off his conscience - - that he had heard about Slater’s conviction and life sentence but that he was the person who had committed the crime. He told Mr. Slater that he was willing to accept responsibility for what he had done.

The inmate signed an affidavit setting for his culpability. Mr. Slater prepared a pro se 3.850 state habeas motion based on this new evidence which he filed with the Circuit Court in Orlando attaching the inmate’s affidavit to it. The Circuit Court set the pro se petition for an evidentiary hearing and this time appointed Slater counsel for the evidentiary hearing. The Court brought both Slater and the other inmate back on a writ for the hearing. The inmate who had confessed to the crime was brought back first, and the State Attorney interviewed him and investigated his claim - - and concluded that he was telling the truth.

Slater then retained attorney Mark Blechman of Orlando to represent him at the evidentiary hearing. The state Circuit Judge personally examined the inmate claiming to have committed the crime. Using crime scene photos that the state attorney provided the Court, the Circuit Judge quizzed the inmate on the details of the crime scene, asking questions that only the person who had been at the crime scene could reasonably have known - - and perhaps to the judge’s surprise, the inmate was able to answer every question put to him by the Court. The judge acknowledged from the bench that the inmate was telling the truth, that in fact, he was the man who had committed the crime. At the end of the hearing the judge ruled from the bench, granting Willie Lee Slater’s motion. The state promptly filed a notice dismissing the charges against Mr. Slater and he was released on his birthday, September 14, 2009.

After eleven years of false imprisonment, Willie Lee Slater was a free man.