Opinion ID: 1779107
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 17

Heading: Validity of Dufour's Death Sentence

Text: In his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, Dufour challenges the validity of his death sentence by arguing that Florida's capital sentencing statute is unconstitutional under Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584, 122 S.Ct. 2428, 153 L.Ed.2d 556 (2002). This Court has rejected similar claims in Bottoson v. Moore, 833 So.2d 693 (Fla.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1070, 123 S.Ct. 662, 154 L.Ed.2d 564 (2002); King v. Moore, 831 So.2d 143 (Fla.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1067, 123 S.Ct. 657, 154 L.Ed.2d 556 (2002); and similar cases, see, e.g., Dillbeck v. State, 882 So.2d 969, 976 (Fla.2004). Furthermore, one of the aggravating circumstances found by the trial court in this case was Dufour's prior conviction of a violent felony, a factor which under Apprendi and Ring need not be found by the jury. Jones v. State, 855 So.2d 611, 619 (Fla.2003); see also Doorbal, 837 So.2d at 963 (rejecting Ring claim where one of the aggravating circumstances found by the trial judge was defendant's prior conviction for a violent felony), cert. denied, 539 U.S. 962, 123 S.Ct. 2647, 156 L.Ed.2d 663 (2003). Accordingly, we reject Dufour's claim.