Ricardo Gonzalez v. State of Florida

240 So. 3d 629
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedMarch 23, 2018
DocketSC17-1499
StatusPublished

This text of 240 So. 3d 629 (Ricardo Gonzalez v. State of Florida) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ricardo Gonzalez v. State of Florida, 240 So. 3d 629 (Fla. 2018).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We have for review Ricardo Gonzalez's appeal of the circuit court's order denying Gonzalez's motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. This Court has jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.

Gonzalez's motion sought relief pursuant to the United States Supreme Court's decision in Hurst v. Florida , --- U.S. ----, 136 S.Ct. 616 , 193 L.Ed.2d 504 (2016), and our decision on remand in Hurst v. State(Hurst) , 202 So.3d 40 (Fla. 2016), cert. denied , --- U.S. ----, 137 S.Ct. 2161 , 198 L.Ed.2d 246 (2017). This Court stayed Gonzalez's appeal pending the disposition of Hitchcock v. State , 226 So.3d 216 (Fla.), cert. denied , --- U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 513 , 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017). After this Court decided Hitchcock , Gonzalez responded to this Court's order to show cause arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in this case.

After reviewing Gonzalez's response to the order to show cause, as well as the State's arguments in reply, we conclude that Gonzalez is not entitled to relief. Gonzalez was sentenced to death following a jury's recommendation for death by a vote of eight to four, and his sentence of death became final in 2001. 1 Gonzalez v. State , 786 So.2d 559 , 563 (Fla. 2001). Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to Gonzalez's sentence of death. See *630 Hitchcock , 226 So.3d at 217 . Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Gonzalez's motion.

The Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Gonzalez, we caution that any rehearing motion containing reargument will be stricken. It is so ordered.

LABARGA, C.J., and QUINCE, POLSTON, and LAWSON, JJ., concur.

PARIENTE, J., concurs in result with an opinion.

LEWIS and CANADY, JJ., concur in result.

PARIENTE, J., concurring in result.

I concur in result because I recognize that this Court's opinion in Hitchcock v. State , 226 So.3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert. denied , --- U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 513 , 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017), is now final. However, I continue to adhere to the views expressed in my dissenting opinion in Hitchcock .

1

Although our decision affirming Gonzalez's death sentence does not specify the number of Gonzalez's jurors who voted to recommend death, our decision affirming the denial of his initial motion for postconviction relief does. See Gonzalez v. State , 990 So.2d 1017 , 1022 (Fla. 2008).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Gonzalez v. State
786 So. 2d 559 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2001)
Gonzalez v. State
990 So. 2d 1017 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2008)
Timothy Lee Hurst v. State of Florida
202 So. 3d 40 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2016)
James Ernest Hitchcock v. State of Florida
226 So. 3d 216 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2017)
Hurst v. Florida
577 U.S. 92 (Supreme Court, 2016)
Allen v. United States
138 S. Ct. 513 (Supreme Court, 2017)
Sedlak v. Smith
138 S. Ct. 515 (Supreme Court, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
240 So. 3d 629, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ricardo-gonzalez-v-state-of-florida-fla-2018.