BRUCE DOUGLAS PACE, 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.
Bruce Douglas Pace appealed the circuit court's denial of his motion for relief under Hurst v. Florida, arguing his death sentence should be retroactively vacated. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial because Pace's sentence became final in 1992, before Hurst was decided, and Hurst does not apply retroactively.
Hurst does not apply retroactively to Pace's death sentence because his sentence became final in 1992, prior to the Hurst decision. Therefore, Pace is not entitled to relief under Hurst.
[1] The United States Supreme Court's decision in Hurst v. …
[2] A motion for postconviction relief based on a change in law will be denied if the defendant's sentence became final prior to the effective date of the new legal precedent…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to Pace's sentence of death.”
Establishes the central holding that Hurst does not have retroactive application to sentences that became final before the Hurst decision.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePace was sentenced to death following a jury recommendation for death by a vote of seven to five. His death sentence became final in 1992. Pace filed …
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 Death Penalty Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
We have for review Bruce Douglas Pace's appeal of the circuit court's order denying Pace's motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. This Court has jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.
Pace'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 on 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 Pace'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 this Court decided Hitchcock, Pace responded to this Court's order to show cause arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in this case.
After reviewing Pace's response to the order to show cause, as well as the State's arguments in reply, we conclude that Pace is not entitled to relief. Pace was sentenced to death following a jury's recommendation for death by a vote of seven to five. See Pace v. State, 596 So.2d 1034, 1035 (Fla. 1992).1 His sentence of death became final in 1992. Pace v. Florida, 506 U.S. 885, 113 S.Ct. 244, 121 L.Ed.2d 178 (1992). Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to Pace's sentence of death. See Hitchcock, 226 So.3d at 217. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Pace's motion.
The Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Pace, we caution that any rehearing motion containing reargument will be stricken. It is so ordered.
LABARGA, C.J., and QUINCE, POLSTON, and LAWSON, JJ., concur.
PARIENTE, J., concurs in result with an opinion.
LEWIS and CANADY, JJ., concur in result.
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, *914I continue to adhere to the views expressed in my dissenting opinion in Hitchcock.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited (13 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)
- Pace v. State, 854 So. 2d 167 (Fla. 2003)