Case Number: SC17-984

Judge: PER CURIAM

Court: Supreme Court of Florida

Plaintiff's Attorney: Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Melissa J. Roca, Assistant Attorney General

Defendant's Attorney: Neal Dupree, Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, William Hennis, and Marta Jaszczolt, Assistant Capital Collateral Regional Counsel

Description: hillips’ motion sought relief pursuant to the United States Supreme Court’s
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 hillips’ appeal pending the disposition of Hitchcock v.
State, 226 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert. denied, 138 S. Ct. 513 (2017). After this
Court decided Hitchcock, hillips responded to this Court’s order to show cause
arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in this case.
After reviewing hillips’ response to the order to show cause, as well as the
State’s arguments in reply, we conclude that hillips is not entitled to relief.
hillips was sentenced to death following a jury’s recommendation for death by a
vote of seven to five. Phillips v. State, 705 So. 2d 1320, 1321 (Fla. 1997).
hillips’ sentence of death became final in 1. Phillips v. Florida, 525 U.S. 880
(1998). Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to hillips’ sentence of death.
See Hitchcock, 226 So. 3d at 217. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of hillips’
motion.

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

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: