State v. Gaiter

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Gaiter

207 So. 3d 339, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 17478

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 23, 2016

Docket3D16-1174

StatusPublished

This text of 207 So. 3d 339 (State v. Gaiter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Gaiter, 207 So. 3d 339, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 17478 (Fla. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

LOGUE, J.

The State of Florida filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to review a pretrial decision declaring Florida’s new death penalty statute, § 921.141(1), Florida Statutes (2016), unconstitutional. We have jurisdiction. 1 After the petition was filed, the Florida Supreme Court held the statute was rendered unconstitutional because it failed to require a unanimous jury recommendation of death. In doing so, the Court explained, “[ajlthough the United States Supreme Court has not ruled on whether unanimity is required in the jury’s advisory verdict in capital cases, the foundational precept of the Eighth Amendment calls for unanimity in any death recommendation that results in a sentence of death.” Hurst v. State, No. SC12-1947, 202 So.3d 40, 69, 2016 WL 6036978, at *15 (Fla. Oct. 14, 2016); See Perry v. State, No. SC16-547, 210 So.3d 630, -, 2016 WL 6036982, at *8 (Fla. Oct. 14, 2016) (“we resolve any ambiguity in the Act consistent with our decision in Hurst ”).

Certiorari denied.

1

. See, e.g., State v. Pettis, 520 So.2d 250, 253 (Fla.1988) (noting that the filing of a petition for writ of certiorari is an apt remedy where the application of double jeopardy would prevent the State from obtaining review of an interlocutory trial court order that departed from the essential requirements of the law and frustrated the proper prosecution of a crime).

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

LOGUE, J.

The State of Florida filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to review a pretrial decision declaring Florida’s new death penalty statute, § 921.141(1), Florida Statutes (2016), unconstitutional. We have jurisdiction. 1 After the petition was filed, the Florida Supreme Court held the statute was rendered unconstitutional because it failed to require a unanimous jury recommendation of death. In doing so, the Court explained, “[ajlthough the United States Supreme Court has not ruled on whether unanimity is required in the jury’s advisory verdict in capital cases, the foundational precept of the Eighth Amendment calls for unanimity in any death recommendation that results in a sentence of death.” Hurst v. State, No. SC12-1947, 202 So.3d 40, 69, 2016 WL 6036978, at *15 (Fla. Oct. 14, 2016); See Perry v. State, No. SC16-547, 210 So.3d 630, -, 2016 WL 6036982, at *8 (Fla. Oct. 14, 2016) (“we resolve any ambiguity in the Act consistent with our decision in Hurst ”).

Certiorari denied.

1

. See, e.g., State v. Pettis, 520 So.2d 250, 253 (Fla.1988) (noting that the filing of a petition for writ of certiorari is an apt remedy where the application of double jeopardy would prevent the State from obtaining review of an interlocutory trial court order that departed from the essential requirements of the law and frustrated the proper prosecution of a crime).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

207 So. 3d 339, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 17478, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-gaiter-fladistctapp-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack