Court Opinion

ID: 9873044
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-26 21:20:30.381707+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:46:30.964331
License: Public Domain

PARIENTE, J.,
concurring in result.
Lambrix is the subject of a pending death warrant. Majority op. at 980. The jury’s recommendations for a sentence of death by votes of eight to four and ten to two without any factual findings indicate that the Hurst error in Lambrix’s case was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. See Hurst v. State, 202 So.3d 40, 65 (Fla. 2016); Lambrix v. State, 494 So.2d 1143 (Fla. 1986). Therefore, I would vacate Lambrix’s sentences of death and remand for a new penalty phase under Hurst based on my opinion in Asay v. State, 210 So.3d 1, 2016 WL 7406538 (Fla. Dec. 22, 2016), and elaborated on in Gaskin v. State, 218 So.3d 399, 2017 WL 224772 (Fla. Jan. 31, 2017). Nevertheless, I recognize that I am bound by this Court’s precedent in Asay, which is now final; and, because Lambrix’s sentences became final in 1986, a majority of this Court would not apply Hurst retroactively to his case. Accordingly, I concur in result.