ROBERT JOE LONG, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Robert Joe Long appealed the denial of his Rule 3.851 motion seeking post-conviction relief based on Hurst v. Florida, which changed death sentencing requirements. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial, holding that Hurst does not apply retroactively to Long's death sentence, which became final in 1993.
Hurst does not apply retroactively to Long's death sentence. Because Long's sentence became final in 1993, before the Hurst decision, he is not entitled to relief under that decision.
[1] The Supreme Court's decision in Hurst v. …
[2] A motion for postconviction relief based on Hurst v. …
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Long was sentenced to death following a jury's unanimous recommendation for death.”
Establishes the procedural posture of Long's original sentencing
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLong was sentenced to death following a jury's unanimous recommendation for death in 1992. His death sentence became final in 1993. Long filed a motio…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Sentencing Procedure cases and more on FLexlaw
We have for review Robert Joe Long’s appeal of the circuit court’s order denying his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. This Court has jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.
Long’s motion sought relief pursuant to the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Hurst v. Florida, — U.S. -, 136 S.Ct. 616, 193 L.Ed.2d 504 (2016), and our decision oh remand in Hurst v. State (Hurst), 202 So.3d 40 (Fla. 2016), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 137 S.Ct. 2161, 198 L.Ed.2d 246 (2017). This Court stayed Long’s appeal pending the disposition of Hitchcock v. State, 226 So.3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 138 S.Ct. 513, 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017). After *294this Court- decided Hitchcock, Long responded to this Court’s order to show cause arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in this case.
After reviewing Long’s response to the order to show cause, as well as the State’s arguments in reply, we conclude that Long is not entitled to relief. Long was sentenced to death following a jury’s unanimous recommendation for death. Long v. State, 610 So.2d 1268, 1269 (Fla. 1992). His sentence of death became final in 1993. Long v. Florida, 510 U.S. 832, 114 S.Ct. 104, 126 L.Ed.2d 70 (1993). Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to Long’s sentence of death. See Hitchcock, 226 So.3d at 217. Accordingly, we affirm the denial- of Long’s motion.
The, Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Long, we caution that any rehearing motion containing rear-gument will be stricken, It is so ordered.
LABARGA, C.J., and POLSTON, and LAWSON, Jj., concur.
PARIENTE, J., concurs in result with an opinion.
' LEWIS and CANADY, JJ., concur in result'.
QUINCE, J., recused.
concurring in result.
I concur in result because I recognize that this Court’s opinion in Hitchcock v. State, 226 So.3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert. denied, —- U.S. -, 138 S.Ct, 513, 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017), is now final. However, I continue to adhere to the views expressed in my dissenting opinion in Hitchcock.
PARIENTE, J.,
concurring in result.
I concur in result because I recognize that this Court’s opinion in Hitchcock v. State, 226 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert. denied, —- U.S. -, 138 S.Ct, 513, 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017), is now final. However, I continue to adhere to the views expressed in my dissenting opinion in Hitchcock.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Long v. State, 271 So. 3d 938 (Fla. 2019)…ons and death sentence numerous times. See Long v. State, 118 So. 3d 798 (Fla. 2013) (affirming denial of initial rule 3.851 motion); Long v. State, 183 So. 3d 342 (Fla. 2016) (affirming denial of first successive rule 3.851 motion); Long v. State, 235 So. 3d 293 (Fla. 2018) (affirming denial of second successive rule 3.851 motion).2 Long filed his current challenge to his death sentence—his third successive under rule 3.851—after the governor signed his death warrant on April 23, 2019. After holding an evi…1 / 2
-
Long v. Sec'y, Dep't OF Corr., Warden, Fla. State Prison, John Does, as designee of Barry Reddish, and/or Mark S. Inch, 924 F.3d 1171 (11th Cir. 2019)…of certiorari, Long v. Florida, 510 U.S. 832 (1993), making his convictions and sentences final in 1993. Following the conclusion of his direct appeals, Long unsuccessfully sought postconviction relief in state court three times. See Long v. State, 235 So. 3d 293 (Fla. 2018); Long v. State, 183 So. 3d 342 (Fla. 2016); Long v. State, 118 So. 3d 798 (Fla. 2013). Long also filed a federal habeas petition in the district court in 2013. The district court denied that petition on the merits, and this Court denied…1 / 3
Authorities Cited (12 total)
- Hurst v. Florida., 136 S. Ct. 616 (U.S. 2016)
- Hurst v. State, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016)
- Florida v. Hurst., 137 S. Ct. 2161 (U.S. 2017)
- Hitchcock v. State, 226 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 2017)
- Rainey v. Dist. Attorney Off. of Philadelphia., 138 S. Ct. 513 (U.S. 2017)
- Ward v. Neal, 137 S. Ct. 2161 (U.S. 2017)
- Boone v. Lorie Davis, 137 S. Ct. 2163 (U.S. 2017)
- Loud v. Lorie Davis, 138 S. Ct. 513 (U.S. 2017)
- Allen v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 513 (U.S. 2017)
- Long v. State, 610 So. 2d 1268 (Fla. 1992)