Opinion ID: 4532456
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016).

Text: 2. Hurst v. State, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016), receded from in part by State v. Poole, 45 Fla. L. Weekly S41 (Fla. Jan. 23, 2020). -9- However, rather than rely on Hitchcock, the majority relies on State v. Poole, 45 Fla. L. Weekly S41 (Fla. Jan. 23, 2020), clarified, 45 Fla. L. Weekly S121 (Fla. Apr. 2, 2020), a wrongfully decided opinion to which I strenuously dissented. Because I conclude that the denial of Hurst relief in this case is correctly based on Hitchcock and not Poole, I can only concur in the result. An Appeal from the Circuit Court in and for Miami-Dade County, Ellen Sue Venzer, Judge - Case Nos. 131992CF002141B000XX and 131992CF006089B000XX Todd G. Scher of Law Office of Todd G. Scher, P.L., Hollywood, Florida; and Martin J. McClain of McClain & McDermott, P.A., Wilton Manors, Florida, for Appellant Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, and Lisa-Marie Lerner, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, Florida, for Appellee - 10 -