Bowles v. State
| Citation | 235 So.3d 292 |
| Decision Date | 29 January 2018 |
| Docket Number | No. SC17–1754,SC17–1754 |
| Parties | Gary Ray BOWLES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Florida |
Francis Jerome Shea, Jacksonville, Florida, for Appellant
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Jennifer A. Donahue, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, for Appellee
We have for review Gary Ray Bowles' appeal of the circuit court's order denying Bowles' motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. This Court has jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.
Bowles's motion sought relief pursuant to the United States Supreme Court's decision in Hurst v. Florida, ––– U.S. ––––, 136 S.Ct. 616, 193 L.Ed.2d 504 (2016), and our decision on remand in Hurst v. State (Hurst ), 202 So.3d 40 (Fla. 2016), cert. denied, ––– U.S. ––––, 137 S.Ct. 2161, 198 L.Ed.2d 246 (2017). After this Court decided Hitchcock v. State, 226 So.3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert. denied, ––– U.S. ––––, 138 S.Ct. 513, 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017), we ordered Bowles to show cause why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in this case.
After reviewing Bowles' response to the order to show cause, as well as the State's arguments in reply, we conclude that Bowles is not entitled to relief. Bowles was sentenced to death following a jury's unanimous recommendation for death. Bowles v. State, 804 So.2d 1173, 1175 (Fla. 2001). Bowles's sentence of death became final on June 17, 2002. Bowles v. Florida, 536 U.S. 930, 122 S.Ct. 2603, 153 L.Ed.2d 790 (2002). Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to Bowles' sentence of death. See Hitchcock, 226 So.3d at 217. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Bowles' motion.
The Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Bowles, we caution that any rehearing motion containing reargument will be stricken. It is so ordered.
I concur in result because I recognize that this Court's opinion in Hitchcock v. State, 226 So.3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert. denied, ––– U.S. ––––, 138 S.Ct. 513, 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017), is now final. However, I continue to adhere to the views expressed in my dissenting opinion in Hitchcock.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bowles v. Desantis, 19-12929-P
...based on the Supreme Court’s decision in Hurst v. Florida, ––– U.S. ––––, 136 S. Ct. 616, 193 L.Ed.2d 504 (2016). See Bowles v. State, 235 So. 3d 292, 292–93 (Fla. 2018).Bowles filed another successive post-conviction motion in Florida state court on October 19, 2017, raising for the first ......
-
In re Bowles
...Ct. 616, 193 L.Ed.2d 504 (2016). The state trial court denied that motion and the Florida Supreme Court affirmed. See Bowles v. State, 235 So. 3d 292, 292–93 (Fla. 2018), cert. denied, Bowles v. Florida, ––– U.S. ––––, 139 S. Ct. 157, 202 L.Ed.2d 96 (2018) (mem).E. Fourth State Postconvicti......
-
Bowles v. Sec'y, 19-13150-P
...193 L.Ed.2d 504 (2016). The state trial court denied that motion and the Florida Supreme Court affirmed. See Bowles v. State, 235 So. 3d 292, 292–93 (Fla. 2018) (per curiam), cert. denied, Bowles v. Florida, ––– U.S. ––––, 139 S. Ct. 157, 202 L.Ed.2d 96 (2018) (mem).E. Fourth State Postconv......
-
Bowles v. State
...motion, which he had filed in June 2017, ruling that Hurst2 does not apply retroactively to Bowles' death sentence. See Bowles v. State, 235 So. 3d 292, 292 (Fla. 2018). On October 19, 2017, Bowles filed another successive postconviction motion, raising an intellectual disability claim for ......