BROADBAND ITV, INC., PETITIONER,

v.

HAWAIIAN TELCOM, INC., ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Bargo v. State, 221 So. 3d 562 (Fla. 2017)
  …PARIENTE, J., concurring. I concur -in the reversal for a new penalty phase in light of Hurst v. State (Hurst), 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016), cert. denied No. 16-998, — U.S. —, 137 S.Ct. 2161, 198 L.Ed.2d 246, 2017 WL 635999 (U.S. May 22, 2017), based on the lack of a jury’s unanimous recommendation for death. Although the per curiam opinion does not address proportionality because we are reversing for a new penalty phase, I have serious concerns in this…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Johnston v. State, 246 So. 3d 266 (Fla. 2018)
  …we affirm the denial of Johnston's claim that he is entitled to relief pursuant to Hurst v. Florida , --- U.S. ----, 136 S.Ct. 616, 193 L.Ed.2d 504 (2016), and Hurst v. State , 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016), cert. denied , --- U.S. ----, 137 S.Ct. 2161, 198 L.Ed.2d 246 (2017). Johnston received a unanimous jury recommendation of death and, therefore, the Hurst error in this case is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. See Davis v. State , 207 So. 3d 142, 175 (Fla. 2016). Additionally, we affirm the denial of Johnst…
• Galante Romar Phillips v. State, 249 So. 3d 596 (Fla. 2018)
  …s were waived since they were not briefed by Phillips, and the penalty phase issues were mooted by the new penalty phase ordered by the trial court pursuant to Hurst v. State , 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016), cert. denied , --- U.S. ----, 137 S.Ct. 2161, 198 L.Ed.2d 246 (2017). Because there will be a new penalty phase, it is inconsequential whether Phillips's trial counsel was ineffective for failing to raise the issue of intellectual disability at the previous penalty phase. As the State argued, Phillips may rais…