Title: Stephens v. State
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: SC17-820
State: Florida
Issuer: Florida Supreme Court
Date: January 22, 2018

Supreme Court of Florida 
 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC17-820 
____________ 
 
JASON DEMETRIUS STEPHENS,  
Appellant, 
 
vs. 
 
STATE OF FLORIDA,  
Appellee. 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC17-1204 
____________ 
 
JASON DEMETRIUS STEPHENS,  
Appellant, 
 
vs. 
 
JULIE L. JONES, etc.,  
Appellee. 
 
[January 22, 2018] 
 
 
 
PER CURIAM. 
Jason Demetrius Stephens appeals the circuit court’s order denying his 
motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851 and petitions 
 
- 2 - 
this Court for a writ of habeas corpus.  We have jurisdiction.  See art. V, § 3(b)(1), 
(9), Fla. Const.   
Stephens seeks 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 Stephens’ appeal and consideration of his habeas petition 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, Stephens responded to this 
Court’s order to show cause arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in 
both cases. 
After reviewing Stephens’ response to the order to show cause, as well as 
the State’s arguments in reply, we conclude that Stephens is not entitled to relief.  
Stephens was sentenced to death following a jury’s recommendation for death by a 
vote of nine to three.  Stephens v. State, 787 So. 2d 747, 752 (Fla. 2001).  
Stephens’ sentence of death became final in 2001.  Stephens v. Florida, 534 U.S. 
1025 (2001).  Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to Stephens’ sentence of 
death.  See Hitchcock, 226 So. 3d at 217.  Accordingly, we affirm the denial of 
Stephens’ motion and deny his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. 
 
- 3 - 
The Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Stephens, 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), 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 Duval County,  
Russell Healey, Judge - Case No. 161995CF005326AXXXMA 
And an Original Proceeding – Habeas Corpus  
 
Ann E. Finnell of Finnel, McGuiness, Nezami & Andux, P.A., Jacksonville, 
Florida, and Billy H. Nolas, Chief, Capital Habeas Unit, Northern District of 
Florida, Tallahassee, Florida, 
 
for Appellant/Petitioner 
 
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Lisa Hopkins, Assistant Attorney 
General, Tallahassee, Florida, 
 
for Appellee/Respondent