Steven Edward Stein v. State of Florida , 237 So. 3d 919 ( 2018 )


Menu:
  •           Supreme Court of Florida
    ____________
    No. SC17-1547
    ____________
    STEVEN EDWARD STEIN,
    Appellant,
    vs.
    STATE OF FLORIDA,
    Appellee.
    [January 31, 2018]
    PER CURIAM.
    We have for review Steven Edward Stein’s appeal of the circuit court’s
    order denying Stein’s motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure
    3.851. This Court has jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.
    Stein’s 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). This Court stayed Stein’s appeal pending the disposition of Hitchcock v.
    State, 
    226 So. 3d 216
     (Fla. 2017), cert. denied, 
    138 S. Ct. 513
     (2017). After this
    Court decided Hitchcock, Stein responded to this Court’s order to show cause
    arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in this case.
    After reviewing Stein’s response to the order to show cause, as well as the
    State’s arguments in reply, we conclude that Stein is not entitled to relief. A jury
    convicted Stein of two counts of first-degree murder and recommended a sentence
    of death for both murders by a vote of ten to two. Stein v. State, 
    632 So. 2d 1361
    ,
    1364 (Fla. 1994). Stein’s sentences of death became final in 1994. Stein v.
    Florida, 
    513 U.S. 834
     (1994). Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to Stein’s
    sentences of death. See Hitchcock, 226 So. 3d at 217. Accordingly, we affirm the
    denial of Stein’s motion.
    The Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Stein, 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.
    -2-
    An Appeal from the Circuit Court in and for Duval County,
    Linda McCallum, Judge - Case No. 161991CF001505AXXXMA
    Linda McDermott of McClain & McDermott, P.A., Estero, Florida,
    for Appellant
    Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Charmaine M. Millsaps, Senior Assistant
    Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida,
    for Appellee
    -3-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: SC17-1547

Citation Numbers: 237 So. 3d 919

Filed Date: 1/31/2018

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 1/12/2023