WILLIAM LEE THOMPSON
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial of postconviction relief to William Lee Thompson, whose death sentence became final before the Supreme Court's decision in Hurst v. Florida. The court held that Hurst, which addressed jury sentencing in capital cases, does not apply retroactively to sentences that were final before its ruling.
No, the Hurst v. Florida decision does not apply retroactively to death sentences that became final before the Hurst ruling. Therefore, Thompson is not entitled to relief based on Hurst.
[1] The Supreme Court's decision in Hurst v. …
[2] A motion for postconviction relief based on Hurst v. …
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to Thompson’s sentence of death.”
Establishes the core reason for denying relief.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWilliam Lee Thompson was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death in 1993, with the sentence becoming final that same year. He later fi…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Death Penalty Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM. We have for review William Lee Thompson’s appeal of the postconviction court’s order denying Thompson’s motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. This Court has jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. Thompson’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). Thompson responded to this Court’s order to show cause arguing
- 2 - 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 Thompson’s response to the order to show cause, as well as the State’s arguments in reply, we conclude that Thompson is not entitled to relief. Thompson was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death following a jury’s recommendation for death by a vote of seven to five. Thompson v. State, 619 So. 2d 261, 264 (Fla. 1993). Thompson’s sentence of death became final in 1993. Thompson v. Florida, 510 U.S. 966 (1993). Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to Thompson’s sentence of death. See Hitchcock, 226 So. 3d at 217; see also Foster v. State, No. SC18-860, 2018 WL 6379348, at *2-4 (Fla. Dec. 6, 2018) (explaining why the “elements of ‘capital first-degree murder’ ” argument derived from Hurst and the legislation implementing Hurst “has no merit”). Accordingly, we affirm the postconviction court’s order denying relief. It is so ordered. QUINCE, POLSTON, LABARGA, and LAWSON, JJ., concur. CANADY, C.J., and PARIENTE and LEWIS, JJ., concur in result.
NO MOTION FOR REHEARING WILL BE ALLOWED. An Appeal from the Circuit Court in and for Miami-Dade County, Marisa Tinkler-Mendez, Judge - Case No. 131976CF003350B000XX
Neal Dupree, Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, Marie-Louise Samuels Parmer, Special Assistant Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, and Brittney Nicole Lacy, Staff Attorney, Southern Region, Fort Lauderdale, Florida,
for Appellant
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, and Melissa Roca Shaw, Assistant Attorney General, Miami, Florida,
for Appellee
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Thompson v. State, 261 So. 3d 1255 (Fla. 2019)…93). Thompson’s sentence of death became final in 1993. Thompson v. Florida, 510 U.S. 966 (1993). Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to Thompson’s sentence of death. See Hitchcock, 226 So. 3d at 217; see also Foster v. State, No. SC18-860, 2018 WL 6379348, at *2-4 (Fla. Dec. 6, 2018) (explaining why the “elements of ‘capital first-degree murder’ ” argument derived from Hurst and the legislation implementing Hurst “has no merit”). Accordingly, we affirm the postconviction court’s order denying relief.…
-
Hilton v. State of Fla. & Gary Michael Hilton v. Mark S. Inch, 326 So. 3d 640 (Fla. 2021)
-
Sparre v. State of Fla. & David Kelsey Sparre v. Mark S. Inch, 289 So. 3d 839 (Fla. 2019)
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (14 total)
- Hurst v. Florida., 136 S. Ct. 616 (U.S. 2016)
- Hurst v. State, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016)
- Florida v. Hurst., 137 S. Ct. 2161 (U.S. 2017)
- Hitchcock v. State, 226 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 2017)
- Rainey v. Dist. Attorney Off. of Philadelphia., 138 S. Ct. 513 (U.S. 2017)
- Ward v. Neal, 137 S. Ct. 2161 (U.S. 2017)
- Boone v. Lorie Davis, 137 S. Ct. 2163 (U.S. 2017)
- Loud v. Lorie Davis, 138 S. Ct. 513 (U.S. 2017)
- Allen v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 513 (U.S. 2017)
- Thompson v. State, 619 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 1993)