Pinellas Judge Convicts Plastic Surgeon of First-Degree Murder in Attorney's Killing as Death Penalty Phase Nears

A Pinellas County judge has found Tomasz Kosowski guilty of first-degree murder in the 2023 killing of attorney Steven Cozzi, concluding a trial that was unusual in nearly every procedural respect. Kosowski, a 47-year-old former plastic surgeon, represented himself, waived his right to counsel and waived his right to a jury, leaving the verdict in a capital case entirely to a single judge.

The verdict came on September 23 after roughly six days of testimony and evidence. Reporting on the proceeding indicated the judge returned the verdict about 15 minutes after the conclusion of closing arguments. Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty.

Cozzi's body was never found. Prosecutors built the case on circumstantial and forensic evidence, presenting a theory that Kosowski confronted Cozzi in the bathroom of the attorney's law office on a Tuesday morning and that Cozzi was never seen again. According to the state's account, the dispute originated in civil litigation involving a medical clinic Cozzi represented.

A defendant who represented himself

Self-representation in a capital case is exceptionally rare. The U.S. Supreme Court recognized a constitutional right to self-representation in Faretta v. California, and Florida courts conduct a detailed inquiry, known as a Faretta hearing, before permitting a defendant to waive counsel.

That inquiry establishes that the waiver is knowing, intelligent and voluntary, and that the defendant understands the disadvantages of proceeding without a lawyer. A judge may not deny the right simply because self-representation is unwise.

Kosowski also waived his right to a jury, which is separately permitted under Florida law with the consent of the state and the court. Combining both waivers in a capital case leaves a single judge deciding both guilt and, ultimately, the sentence.

After the conviction, Kosowski told the judge he would continue representing himself during the penalty phase. He also indicated he would not present additional evidence or witnesses and would not argue for a life sentence over death.

A murder case without a body

Prosecuting a homicide without a body is difficult but not unprecedented. The state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt both that the victim is dead and that the defendant caused the death, without the physical evidence that a body ordinarily provides.

Such cases are built on circumstantial evidence: the victim's sudden and complete disappearance, the absence of any activity on financial accounts or communications, forensic evidence at the scene, and the defendant's conduct before and after the disappearance.

Prosecutors presented their case across six days. The state's theory placed the confrontation in the bathroom of Cozzi's law office, and the physical condition of that office was part of the evidentiary picture described in coverage of the trial.

Circumstantial evidence is not a lesser category of proof under Florida law. A conviction may rest entirely on it, provided the evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

What a Spencer hearing is

Kosowski is due back in court on October 8 for a Spencer hearing, a proceeding named for the Florida Supreme Court's decision in Spencer v. State that is required before a capital sentence is imposed.

The hearing gives the defendant an opportunity to present additional mitigating evidence, gives both sides an opportunity to be heard on the appropriate sentence, and gives the court a formal record on which to base its sentencing order.

In a typical capital case, a jury first renders an advisory recommendation on sentence after hearing aggravating and mitigating evidence. Because Kosowski waived the jury for the penalty phase as well, the judge will make that determination directly.

Florida law requires the sentencing court to enter a written order setting out the aggravating factors found, the mitigating circumstances considered and the weight assigned to each. That order is the document appellate courts review most closely.

Mitigation without a defense team

Capital defense normally involves a mitigation specialist whose function is to investigate a defendant's background, including childhood, medical history, mental health and any trauma, and to present that material to the sentencer.

Mitigation is often the entire substance of a capital defense once guilt is established, and the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly held that failure to investigate and present mitigation can constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.

A defendant representing himself who declines to present mitigation removes that entire category of evidence from the sentencing calculus. Courts have addressed such situations before, and some jurisdictions require independent presentation of mitigation regardless of a defendant's wishes.

Florida courts have discretion to appoint standby counsel to assist a self-represented defendant, and whether that occurs here will shape the October 8 proceeding.

Florida's capital sentencing framework

Florida has changed its capital sentencing law repeatedly over the past decade in response to federal and state court decisions, most significantly regarding the role of the jury and the unanimity requirement.

Under current Florida law, a jury recommendation of death does not require unanimity, a change from the prior standard. That framework applies where a jury is empaneled; here the judge sits as the finder of fact.

Aggravating factors are enumerated by statute and must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Mitigating circumstances may be statutory or nonstatutory and need only be reasonably established.

Every Florida death sentence is subject to automatic direct appeal to the Florida Supreme Court, which reviews both the conviction and the proportionality of the sentence.

The appellate posture

A conviction obtained after a defendant waived counsel and waived a jury presents a distinctive appellate record. Appeals in such cases frequently focus on the adequacy of the waiver colloquies rather than on trial errors.

Because Kosowski conducted his own defense, claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are largely unavailable to him. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that a defendant who chooses self-representation cannot later complain that his own performance was deficient.

That limitation narrows the postconviction avenues substantially, leaving the waiver inquiries, the sufficiency of the evidence and the sentencing order as the principal grounds.

Capital appeals in Florida take years, and direct review by the Florida Supreme Court is only the first stage of a process that includes state postconviction proceedings and federal habeas review.

What it means for Tampa Bay

For the Pinellas County legal community, the killing of a practicing attorney in his own law office was a shock that raised questions about security in professional offices that operate as open-door businesses.

For Cozzi's family and colleagues, the conviction resolves the question of responsibility but not the absence of a body, which forecloses the ordinary rituals that follow a death.

For the State Attorney's Office in the Sixth Judicial Circuit, which covers Pinellas and Pasco counties, the case was an unusually difficult prosecution that succeeded without the central piece of evidence such cases usually rest on.

For the broader public, the case is a reminder that Florida's capital process is lengthy, heavily procedural and subject to extensive appellate review regardless of how clear a trial record appears.

How Florida's death penalty law has shifted

Florida's capital sentencing statute has been rewritten multiple times in the past decade in response to constitutional litigation. The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Hurst v. Florida invalidated the state's prior scheme, which had allowed judges to find the facts necessary for a death sentence, and Florida rewrote the law in response.

The Florida Supreme Court subsequently interpreted that legislation to require jury unanimity for a death recommendation, then reversed course, and the Legislature later enacted a statute permitting a death sentence on a non-unanimous jury recommendation. Florida is now among a small number of states that do not require unanimity.

That history matters for a case in which the jury has been waived entirely, because the accumulated case law addresses the allocation of fact-finding between judge and jury. A defendant who waives the jury removes that allocation question but creates others about the validity and scope of the waiver.

Florida has the second-largest death row population in the country, and the state has carried out executions at an increased pace in recent years, which places cases like this one within an active rather than dormant capital system.

The unusual posture of this case

Trial judges confronted with a self-represented capital defendant face a structural tension. The court must respect the defendant's constitutional choice while ensuring the proceeding remains fair and the record adequate for appellate review.

Judges commonly appoint standby counsel in that situation, an attorney available to assist without controlling the defense. Standby counsel can preserve objections, advise on procedure and step in if the defendant becomes unable to continue.

The penalty phase presents the sharpest version of the problem. A defendant who declines to present mitigation and declines to argue for life leaves the sentencing court with an evidentiary record containing aggravation and little else.

Appellate courts reviewing such records have to assess whether a sentence was reliably determined when one side of the balance was never presented, a question with a substantial body of case law behind it.

What's next

The Spencer hearing is scheduled for October 8, after which the judge will impose a sentence of either life imprisonment without the possibility of parole or death.

Whatever the outcome, a written sentencing order will follow, and a death sentence would trigger automatic review by the Florida Supreme Court.

Whether Kosowski continues to represent himself through sentencing and appeal remains his decision, subject to the court's continuing obligation to ensure any waiver is knowing and voluntary.

The Pinellas County Clerk of the Circuit Court maintains the public docket, where filings and hearing dates in the case are available.