Filed: Jan. 30, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: Supreme Court of Florida _ No. SC17-1711 _ TONEY DERON DAVIS, Petitioner, vs. JULIE L. JONES, etc., Respondent. [January 30, 2018] PER CURIAM. Toney Deron Davis petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus seeking 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 has jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(9), Fla.
Summary: Supreme Court of Florida _ No. SC17-1711 _ TONEY DERON DAVIS, Petitioner, vs. JULIE L. JONES, etc., Respondent. [January 30, 2018] PER CURIAM. Toney Deron Davis petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus seeking 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 has jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(9), Fla. C..
More
Supreme Court of Florida
____________
No. SC17-1711
____________
TONEY DERON DAVIS,
Petitioner,
vs.
JULIE L. JONES, etc.,
Respondent.
[January 30, 2018]
PER CURIAM.
Toney Deron Davis petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus seeking
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 has
jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(9), Fla. Const.
After this Court decided Hitchcock v. State, 226 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert.
denied,
138 S. Ct. 513 (2017), we ordered Davis to show cause why Hitchcock
should not be dispositive in this case.
After reviewing Davis’s response to the order to show cause, as well as the
State’s arguments in reply, we conclude that Davis is not entitled to relief. Davis
was sentenced to death following a jury’s recommendation for death by a vote of
eleven to one. Davis v. State, 703 So. 2d 1055, 1057 (Fla. 1997). Davis’s sentence
of death became final in 1998. Davis v. Florida,
524 U.S. 930 (1998). Thus, Hurst
does not apply retroactively to Davis’s sentence. See
Hitchcock, 226 So. 3d at
217. Accordingly, we deny Davis’s petition.
The Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Davis, 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), is now
final. However, I continue to adhere to the views expressed in my dissenting
opinion in Hitchcock.
Original Proceeding – Habeas Corpus, Duval County,
Case No. 161992CF013193AXXXMA
Rick A. Sichta, Susanne K. Sichta, and Joe Hamrick of The Sichta Firm, LLC,
Jacksonville, Florida,
-2-
for Petitioner
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Jennifer L. Keegan, Assistant Attorney
General, Tallahassee, Florida,
for Respondent
-3-
