Davis v. State - 207 So. 3d 142 (Fla. 2016)

Rule:

Florida's capital sentencing scheme violates the Sixth Amendment. The Sixth Amendment requires a jury, not a judge, to find each fact necessary to impose a sentence of death. A jury's mere recommendation is not enough. In addition to unanimously finding the existence of any aggravating factor, the jury must also unanimously find that the aggravating factors are sufficient for the imposition of death and unanimously find that the aggravating factors outweigh the mitigation before a sentence of death may be considered by the judge. a unanimous jury recommendation is required before a trial court may impose a sentence of death. Finally, Hurst v. Florida error is capable of harmless error review.

Facts:

Leon Davis, Jr. (Davis), was convicted in Polk County of the murders of Yvonne Bustamante and Juanita Luciano. Davis now pursued the direct appeal of his convictions and sentences which are subject to automatic review by the court. Davis argued that he is entitled to relief under Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616, 193 L. Ed. 2d 504 (2016) (Hurst v. Florida).

Issue:

Was any Hurst v. Florida error during Davis's penalty phase proceedings harmless beyond a reasonable doubt?

Answer:

Yes

Conclusion:

The court concluded that the State can sustain its burden of demonstrating that any Hurst v. Florida error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Here, the jury unanimously found all of the necessary facts for the imposition of death sentences by virtue of its unanimous recommendations. In fact, although the jury was informed that it was not required to recommend death unanimously, and despite the mitigation presented, the jury still unanimously recommended that Davis be sentenced to death for the murders of Bustamante and Luciano. The unanimous recommendations here are precisely what the court determined in Hurst to be constitutionally necessary to impose a sentence of death. Accordingly, Davis was not entitled to a new penalty phase.