M ORE L AW
LEXAPEDIA
Salus Populi Suprema Lex Esto

Information
About MoreLaw
Contact MoreLaw

Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 01-30-2018

Case Style:

THOMAS LEE GUDINAS vs. STATE OF FLORIDA

Case Number: SC17-919

Judge: PER CURIAM

Court: Supreme Court of Florida

Plaintiff's Attorney: Pamela Jo Bondi
Attorney General

Doris Meacham
Assistant Attorney General

Defendant's Attorney: James Vincent Viggiano, Jr., Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, and Ali A. Shakoor, Assistant Capital Collateral Regional Counsel

Description: We have for review Thomas Lee Gudinasís appeal of the circuit courtís
order denying Gudinasís motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal
Procedure 3.851. This Court has jurisdiction. See art. V, ß 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.
Gudinasís motion sought relief pursuant to the United States Supreme
Courtís decision in Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016), and our decision on
remand in Hurst v. State (Hurst), 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016), cert. denied, 137 S. Ct.
2161 (2017). This Court stayed Gudinasís appeal pending the disposition of
Hitchcock v. State, 226 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert. denied, 138 S. Ct. 513 (2017).


- 2 -
After this Court decided Hitchcock, Gudinas responded to this Courtís order to
show cause arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in this case.
After reviewing Gudinasís response to the order to show cause, as well as
the Stateís arguments in reply, we conclude that Gudinas is not entitled to relief.
Gudinas was sentenced to death following a juryís recommendation for death by a
vote of ten to two. Gudinas v. State, 693 So. 2d 953, 959 (Fla. 1997). His
sentence of death became final in 1997. Gudinas v. Florida, 522 U.S. 936 (1997).
Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to Gudinasís sentence of death. See
Hitchcock, 226 So. 3d at 217. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Gudinasís
motion.

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

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:



 
 
Home | Add Attorney | Add Expert | Add Court Reporter | Sign In
Find-A-Lawyer By City | Find-A-Lawyer By State and City | Articles | Recent Lawyer Listings
Verdict Corrections | Link Errors | Advertising | Editor | Privacy Statement
© 1996-2018 MoreLaw, Inc. - All rights reserved.