Salus Populi Suprema Lex Esto

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:


Case Number: SC17-1324


Court: Supreme Court of Florida

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

Defendant's Attorney: Neal Dupree, Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, Bryan E. Martinez, Staff Attorney, and Rachel L. Day, Assistant Capital Collateral Regional Counsel

Description: We have for review Marbel Mendoza’s appeal of the circuit court’s order
denying Mendoza’s motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure
3.851. This Court has jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.
Mendoza’s 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 Mendoza’s 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, Mendoza responded to this Court’s order to
show cause arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in this case.
After reviewing Mendoza’s response to the order to show cause, as well as
the State’s arguments in reply, we conclude that Mendoza is not entitled to relief.
Mendoza was sentenced to death following a jury’s recommendation for death by a
vote of seven to five. Mendoza v. State, 700 So. 2d 670, 673 (Fla. 1997).
Mendoza’s sentence of death became final in 1998. Mendoza v. Florida, 525 U.S.
839 (1998). Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to Mendoza’s sentence of
death. See Hitchcock, 226 So. 3d at 217. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of
Mendoza’s motion.

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

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:


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.