Rodriguez v. State

The Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Appellant’s motion filed pursuant to Fla. R. Criminal. P. 3.851, holding that this Court’s prior denial of Appellant’s postconviction appeal raising similar claims was a procedural bar to the claim at issue in this appeal.Appellant’s motion sought relief pursuant to the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016), and the Supreme Court’s decision on remand in Hurst v. State (Hurst), 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016). The circuit court denied relief. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that, even if his motion was not procedurally barred, Appellant was not entitled to relief under Hurst or the legislation implementing the rights recognized in Hurst. View "Rodriguez v. State" on Justia Law