Case Name: Amos Lee KING, Petitioner, v. Michael W. MOORE, etc., Respondent
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2002-10-24
Citations: 831 So. 2d 143
Docket Number: No. SC02-1457
Parties: Amos Lee KING, Petitioner, v. Michael W. MOORE, etc., Respondent.
Judges: WELLS, J., and HARDING, Senior Justice, concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 831
Pages: 143–156

Head Matter:
Amos Lee KING, Petitioner, v. Michael W. MOORE, etc., Respondent.
No. SC02-1457.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Oct. 24, 2002.
William Jennings, Capital Collateral Regional Counsel — Middle Region, and Kevin T. Beck, Assistant CCRC, Eric Pinkard, Assistant CCRC, and Mark Gruber, Assistant CCRC, Middle Region, Tampa, FL; and Mark E. Olive of Law Offices of Mark E. Olive, P.A., Tallahaseee, FL, for Petitioner.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Carol M. Dittmar, Senior Assistant Attorney General, and Stephen D. Ake, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, FL, for Respondent.
Charles T. Canady, General Counsel, and Wendy W. Berger, Assistant General Counsel, Tallahassee, FL, for Honorable Jeb Bush, Governor of the State of Florida; and Arthur I. Jacobs, General Counsel, Fernandino Beach, FL, and Raymond L. Marky, Assistant State Attorney, Second Judicial Circuit, Tallahassee, FL, for Florida Prosecuting Attorney Association, Amicus Curiae.
Nancy Daniels, Public Defender, Second Judicial Circuit, and President-elect, The Florida Public Defender Association, Inc., Tallahassee, FL; Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Christina A. Spauld-ing, Assistant Public Defender, Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Miami, FL; Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Gary Caldwell, Assistant Public Defender, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, West Palm Beach, FL; and Robert Wesley, Public Defender, and George Allen Couture, Assistant Public Defender, Ninth Judicial Circuit, Orlando, FL, for The Florida Public Defender Association, Inc., Amicus Curiae.
Robert Augustus Harper, Jr. of Robert Augustus Harper Law Firm, P.A., Tallaha-see, FL; and James T. Miller, Chair, Ami-cus Committee, FACDL, Jacksonville, FL, for Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Amicus Curiae.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Amos Lee King, a prisoner under sentence of death and an active death warrant, petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus. He seeks relief pursuant to Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584, -, 122 S.Ct. 2428, 2443, 153 L.Ed.2d 556 (2002), wherein the United States Supreme Court held unconstitutional the Arizona capital sentencing statute "to the extent that it allows a sentencing judge, sitting without a jury, to find an aggravating circumstance necessary for imposition of the death penalty."
Although King contends that he is entitled to relief under Ring, we decline to so hold. The United States Supreme Court in February 2002 stayed King's execution and placed the present case in abeyance while it decided Ring. That Court then, in June 2002, issued its decision in Ring, summarily denied King's petition for cer-tiorari, and lifted the stay without mentioning Ring in the King order. The Court did not direct the Florida Supreme Court to reconsider King in fight of Ring.
Significantly, the United States Supreme Court has repeatedly reviewed and upheld Florida's capital sentencing statute over the past quarter of a century and although King contends that there now are areas of "irreconcilable conflict" in that precedent, the Court in Ring did not address this issue. In a comparable situation, the United States Supreme Court held:
If a precedent of this Court has direct application in a case, yet appears to rest on reasons rejected in some other line of decisions, the [other courts] should follow the case which directly controls, leaving to this Court the prerogative of overruling its own decisions.
Rodriquez De Quijas v. Shearson/American Express, 490 U.S. 477, 484, 109 S.Ct. 1917, 104 L.Ed.2d 526 (1989).
Accordingly, we deny King's petition for habeas relief. This Court's stay of execution shall terminate at 5 p.m. on the thirtieth day following the filing of this opinion. No motion for rehearing will be allowed.
It is so ordered.
WELLS, J., and HARDING, Senior Justice, concur.
HARDING, Senior Justice, concurs with an opinion.
WELLS, J., concurs specially with an opinion.
ANSTEAD, C.J., and SHAW and LEWIS, JJ., concur in result only with opinions.
PARIENTE, J., concurs in result only with an opinion, in which ANSTEAD, C.J., concurs.
QUINCE, J., recused.
. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(9), Fla. Const.
. See King v. Florida, 534 U.S. 1118, 122 S.Ct. 932, 151 L.Ed.2d 894 (2002).
. See King v. Florida, - U.S. -, 122 S.Ct. 2670, 153 L.Ed.2d 843 (2002).
. See, e.g., Hildwin v. Florida, 490 U.S. 638, 109 S.Ct. 2055, 104 L.Ed.2d 728 (1989); Spaziano v. Florida, 468 U.S. 447, 104 S.Ct. 3154, 82 L.Ed.2d 340 (1984); Barclay v. Florida, 463 U.S. 939, 103 S.Ct. 3418, 77 L.Ed.2d 1134 (1983); Proffitt v. Florida, 428 U.S. 242, 96 S.Ct. 2960, 49 L.Ed.2d 913 (1976).