ANTONIO LABARON MELTON
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
Hurst v. Florida does not apply retroactively to death sentences that became final before the Hurst decision.
[1] The retroactive application of Hurst v. …
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMelton was sentenced to death following a jury recommendation for death by a vote of eight to four in 1994. His death sentence became final in 1994.…
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 Application cases and more on FLexlaw
Supreme Court of Florida
____________
No. SC17-1147 ____________
ANTONIO LEBARON MELTON, Appellant,
vs.
STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.
[February 2, 2018]
PER CURIAM.
We have for review Antonio Lebaron Melton’s appeal of the circuit court’s order denying Melton’s motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. This Court has jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. Melton’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 Melton’s appeal pending the disposition of Hitchcock v. State, 226 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert. denied, 138 S. Ct. 513 (2017). After this
Court decided Hitchcock, Melton responded to this Court’s order to show cause arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in this case. After reviewing Melton’s response to the order to show cause, as well as the State’s arguments in reply, we conclude that Melton is not entitled to relief. Melton was sentenced to death following a jury’s recommendation for death by a vote of eight to four. Melton v. State, 638 So. 2d 927, 928 (Fla. 1994). His sentence of death became final in 1994. Melton v. Florida, 513 U.S. 971 (1994). Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to Melton’s sentence of death. See Hitchcock, 226 So. 3d at 217. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Melton’s motion. The Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Melton, 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, 138 S. Ct. 513 (2017), is now final. However, I continue to adhere to the views expressed in my dissenting opinion in Hitchcock.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court in and for Escambia County,
W. Joel Boles, Judge - Case No. 171991CF000373XXXBXX
Linda McDermott of McClain & McDermott, P.A., Estero, Florida,
for Appellant
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Charmaine Millsaps, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida,
for Appellee
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Melton v. State (Fla. 2023)
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)
- Czajkowski v. State, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016)