THOMAS DEWEY POPE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE.

Fla. | 2018-02-28
No. SC17–1812
237 So. 3d 926 Florida Supreme Court (2018)

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.


Holding

The court held that the defendant is not entitled to relief because the Supreme Court's decision in Hurst v. Florida does not apply retroactively to his death sentence, which became final in 1984.


Headnotes

[1] The United States Supreme Court's decision in Hurst v. …

[2] A motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851 is properly denied when the controlling precedent dictates that the relief s…

Previewing 2 of 4 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

Facts & Procedural History

Thomas Dewey Pope appealed the circuit court's denial of his motion for post-conviction relief. Pope sought relief based on the Supreme Court's decisi…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We have for review Thomas Dewey Pope's appeal of the circuit court's order denying Pope's motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. This Court has jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.

Pope'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). After this Court decided Hitchcock v. State , 226 So.3d 216 (Fla.), cert. denied , --- U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 513, 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017), Pope responded to this Court's order to show cause arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in this case.

After reviewing Pope's response to the order to show cause, as well as the State's arguments in reply, we conclude that Pope is not entitled to relief. Pope was sentenced to death following a jury's recommendation for death by a vote of nine to *927three, and his sentence of death became final in 1984. Pope v. State , 441 So.2d 1073, 1075 (Fla. 1983) ; Pope v. Sec'y for Dep't of Corrs. , 680 F.3d 1271, 1278 (11th Cir. 2012). Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to Pope's sentence of death. See Hitchcock , 226 So.3d at 217. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Pope's motion.

The Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Pope, 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, I continue to adhere to the views expressed in my dissenting opinion in Hitchcock .


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited (11 total)

View all 11 cited authorities →

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw