FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF
Appeal from the Circuit Court in and for Orange County, Marc
L. Lubet, Judge - Case No. 481983CF001682000AOX
McDermott of McClain & McDermott, P.A., Estero, Florida,
Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, and Scott
A. Browne, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, Florida,
for review Robert Ira Peede's appeal of the
postconviction court's order denying Peede's motion
filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851.
This Court has jurisdiction. See art. V, §
3(b)(1), Fla. Const.
motion sought 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). Peede responded
to this Court's order to show cause arguing why
Hitchcock v. State, 226 So.3d 216 (Fla.), cert.
denied, 138 S.Ct. 513 (2017), should not be dispositive
in this case. After reviewing Peede's response to the
order to show cause, as well as the State's arguments in
reply, we ordered full briefing on Peede's
non-Hurst related claim.
reviewed the arguments presented, we conclude that the
postconviction court properly denied Peede's claims.
Peede was sentenced to death following a jury's
recommendation for death by a vote of eleven to one. See
Peede v. State, 474 So.2d 808, 810 (Fla.
1985). His sentence of death became final in
1986. Peede v. Florida, 477 U.S. 909 (1986). Thus,
Hurst does not apply retroactively to Peede's
sentence of death. See Hitchcock, 226 So.3d at 217.
Accordingly, we affirm the postconviction court's denial
of Peede's motion.
carefully considering all arguments raised by Peede, we
caution that any rehearing motion containing reargument will
QUINCE, POLSTON, and LABARGA, JJ, concur
CANADY, CJ, concurs in result
LAWSON, J, recused
PARIENTE, J, ...