Filing # 93611549 E-Filed 08/02/2019 05:10:30 PM

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA

CASE NUMBER: 2016 CF 15738 A

STATE OF FLORIDA,
Plaintiff,
vs.

MARKEITH LOYD,
Defendant.
_____________________/

MOTION TO CONTINUE

The Defendant, through his undersigned counsel, moves this Court to enter an order continuing
Mr. Loyd’s September trial date. As grounds in support, Defendant states the following:

1. Mr. Markeith Loyd is facing two capital counts for the shooting deaths of Ms. Sade
Dixon & her unborn child in 2016 and is facing the death penalty.
2. Mr. Markeith Loyd is also charged with the 2017 shooting death of Master Sgt. Debra
Clayton and is facing the death penalty.
3. It is alleged that by the State that Mr. Loyd shot Sgt. Clayton with the same gun used in
the homicide of Ms. Dixon.
4. It is further alleged by the State that Mr. Loyd’s shooting of Sgt. Clayton demonstrates
Mr. Loyd’s consciousness of guilt in the shooting of Ms. Dixon.
5. The State previously filed their intent to use evidence surrounding the circumstances of
Sgt. Clayton’s murder in Mr. Loyd’s 2016 case involving the homicide of Ms. Dixon.
6. The Defendant filed an objection to the State’s notice because the introduction of Sgt.
Clayton’s shooting would impermissibly become a feature of Mr. Loyd’s 2016 case.
7. Subsequently, the Court ruled that the State could introduce: 1. Evidence and witnesses
that establish the gun used in the shooting of Ms. Dixon and Sgt. Clayton is the same gun,
2. That the Defendant was in possession of that gun at the time of arrest, 3. Testimony of
Ms. Bryant to establish that she identified the Defendant and notified Sgt. Clayton of his
presence at Walmart, 4. Testimony regarding Ms. Bryant’s statements to Sgt. Clayton,

1
 the events preceding the shooting, including Sgt. Clayton’s statements to the Defendant,
and 5. Testimony of Mr. Striby to identify the defendant and to testify regarding the
events immediately following the shooting.
8. Further, the Court precluded the introduction of the Walmart video, Sgt. Clayton’s radio
transmission, and any evidence that would indicate to the jury that Sgt. Clayton was
killed. This ruling was without prejudice should the Defendant “open the door.”
9. Undersigned counsels have been working diligently on both Mr. Loyd’s 2016 and 2017
case with a focus on Ms. Dixon’s homicide in anticipation of the September trial date.
10. Because of this Court’s ruling, the Defendant is now in the position where he must
substantially defend against the State’s theory that the shooting of Sgt. Clayton is
evidence of consciousness of guilt in Ms. Dixon’s murder.
11. Undersigned counsels cannot possibly be ready to address both Ms. Dixon’s and Sgt.
Clayton’s homicide in September as the Defense is still in the process of investigating
and developing a defense theory in Mr. Loyd’s 2017 case.
12. Although the Court precluded evidence that Sgt. Clayton was killed, it is without a doubt
that most if not all jurors know or can surmise that Sgt. Clayton died in the line of duty
considering Mr. Loyd’s case has inundated Orange County’s news cycle for years.
13. Undersigned counsels would be ineffective if considerable time was not spent during voir
dire addressing the shooting death of Sgt. Dixon.
14. The Defendant is still currently participating in the discovery process of Sgt. Clayton’s
homicide. Over twenty civilian witnesses and several crime scene and law enforcement
witnesses have yet to be deposed.
15. Undersigned counsels have just received the 18th Judicial Circuit’s report investigating
the use of force against Mr. Loyd at the time of filing of this motion.
16. The Defense team is still in the process of investigating its defense theory in Sgt.
Clayton’s homicide with several witnesses including experts, some of whom may testify
regarding the Defendant’s state of mind at the time of the shooting of Sgt. Clayton.
17. Also, the Defense team is currently working with a firearms expert to test evidence found
at the scene of Sgt. Clayton’s homicide to determine if any shots were fired from Sgt.
Clayton’s firearm.

2
 18. Undersigned counsels are also consulting with video and use of force experts to analyze
the video evidence in Sgt. Clayton’s homicide.
19. The continuing investigation of Sgt. Clayton’s homicide is extremely relevant to issues
regarding Mr. Loyd’s consciousness of guilt at the time of Sgt. Clayton’s shooting.
20. The Defendant is requesting this Court reset Mr. Loyd’s 2016 case to April of next year
so that it may be tried in conjunction with his 2017 case.
21. The Defendant would further request an extension of all previously set deadlines in Mr.
Loyd’s 2016 case.

WHEREFORE, for the above reasons, the Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable
Court to enter an order granting this motion.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing motion was served

via Efiling notification on the Office of the State Attorney this 2nd day of August, 2019.

Respectfully Submitted,

s/Terence M. Lenamon_____
Terence M. Lenamon
Florida Bar No. 970476
Daniel Schwarz
Florida Bar No. 84665
245 S.E. 1st St.
Suite 404
Miami, FL 33131
p. 305-373-9911
f. 305-503-6973