Florida Supreme Court dismisses petition regarding application of 8-4 statute
Last week, the Florida Supreme Court dismissed Bessman Okafor's petition asking the Court for relief from application of Florida's new capital sentencing statute in his resentencing.
So far, six capital defendants have asked the Florida Supreme Court for relief from the trial courts’ application of Florida’s new capital sentencing statute to their Hurst resentencing proceedings. As of last week, two of the petitions have been dismissed—one by agreement and one by the Court:
Hertz - The Florida Supreme Court stayed Hertz’s resentencing in Wakulla County pending resolution of his petition, which was later dismissed upon agreement by the parties.
Looney (SC2023-0886) - Looney’s petition was filed at the same time as Hertz’s, and his resentencing in Wakulla County is also stayed pending resolution of the petition. The State’s motion to dismiss remains pending.
Gonzalez (SC2023-0740) - After some confusion, the State responded to Gonzalez’s Amended Petition on August 25. Gonzalez’s Reply was filed on September 1. Since then, both sides have filed Notices of Supplemental Authority.
Smith (SC2023-1151) - The Court denied Smith’s request to stay his resentencing pending the resolution of his petition. The State responded to Smith’s Petition on August 25. Smith’s Reply was filed September 11. The State filed a Notice of Supplemental Authority on September 26.
McGirth (SC2023-1229) - The trial court (Marion County) stayed McGirth’s resentencing pending resolution of his petition. The State filed a Motion to Dismiss on September 20 and a Notice of Supplemental Authority on September 26.
Okafor - Okafor sought a stay of his resentencing scheduled for early October. The State filed a Motion to Dismiss on September 20. As explained below, the Court granted the State’s Motion last week.
NOTE: This list does not include (a) cases in which the defendant has been sentenced to death under the 2023 statute and the case is at the Florida Supreme Court on direct appeal, or (b) the petition filed by Hunter and Victorino yesterday, which presents a bit of a different issue.
Okafor Dismissal
As TFDP previously covered, Okafor’s was the sixth-filed petition at the Florida Supreme Court related to the application of Florida’s 2023 capital sentencing statute to his Hurst resentencing.
On September 20, the State filed a Motion to Dismiss Okafor’s petition, arguing that the Court “need not reach the merits of the petition” because the issues presented are “best addressed in a post-trial direct appeal.”
On September 26, the State filed a Notice of Supplemental Authority, attaching the Fifth District Court of Appeal’s written decision in Victorino/Hunter.1
The docket does not reflect a response to the Motion to Dismiss.
On October 9, the same day Okafor’s trial began in Orange County, the Court issued a one-page Order granting the State’s Motion to Dismiss. The Order stated in full:
Bessman Okafor has petitioned this Court, asking us to decide whether a recent legislative change to the death penalty statute applies at his new penalty phase. The State of Florida, in turn, asks us to dismiss Okafor’s petition. Finding that we lack jurisdiction to consider Okafor’s petition, we grant the State’s motion and dismiss Okafor’s petition. Consistent with this ruling, we also deny Okafor’s requests for a stay and oral argument.
Justice Labarga dissented from the decision and voted to grant the motion to stay and consider Okafor’s petition on the merits.
The four other petitions (discussed above) remain pending at the Court.