MCGOUGH

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Fullerton v. Fullerton, 709 So. 2d 162 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)
  …elor’s observations, there was no proffer of what the testimony would be, except that there was some vague reference to the child’s desire for a cat. No reversible error has been shown. See Lucas v. State, 568 So. 2d 18, 22 (Fla.1990), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 845, 114 S.Ct. 136, 126 L.Ed.2d 99 (1993) (holding proffer necessary to preserve claim that testimony improperly ruled inadmissable). The former husband called a psychiatrist to testify that he thought the father would be a better custodial parent. The…
• Stuberfield v. State, 690 So. 2d 636 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
  …tat. Because a trial court's findings of fact are always presumed correct, we do not think that the legislature's inclusion of the presumption in the statute is a real change. See, e.g., Lucas v. State, 613 So. 2d 408, 410 (Fla. 1992), cert, denied, 510 U.S. 845, 114 S.Ct. 136, 126 L.Ed.2d 99 (1993), holding that a trial court’s finding of fact on a mitigator in a capital case is presumed correct.…
• Lucas v. State, 234 So. 3d 647 (Fla. 2018)
  …s is not entitled to relief. Lucas was sentenced to death following a jury’s recommendation for death by a vote of eleven to one. See Lucas v. State, 613 So. 2d 408, 409 (Fla. 1992).1 Lucas’s sentence of death became final in 1993. Lucas v. Florida, 510 U.S. 845, 114 S.Ct. 136, 126 L.Ed.2d 99 (1993). Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to Lucas’s sentence of death; See Hitchcock, 226 So. 3d at 217. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Lucas’s motion. The Court having carefully considered all arguments…