Supreme Court of Florida
____________
No. SC17-1401
____________
EMANUEL JOHNSON,
Appellant,
vs.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
____________
No. SC17-1402
____________
EMANUEL JOHNSON,
Appellant,
vs.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
[February 2, 2018]
PER CURIAM.
We have for review Emanuel Johnson’s appeals of the circuit court’s order
denying his motions filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851.
This Court has jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.
Johnson’s motions 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). This Court stayed Johnson’s appeals pending the disposition of
Hitchcock v. State, 226 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert. denied, No. 17-6180, 2017
WL 4355572 (U.S. Dec. 4, 2017). After this Court decided Hitchcock, Johnson
responded to this Court’s orders to show cause arguing why Hitchcock should not
be dispositive in his cases.
After reviewing Johnson’s responses to the order to show cause, as well as
the State’s arguments in reply, we conclude that Johnson is not entitled to relief.
Johnson was sentenced to death for the murder of Iris White following a jury’s
recommendation for death by a vote of eight to four. Johnson v. State, 660 So. 2d
637, 641 (Fla. 1995). Johnson was also sentenced to death for the murder of Jackie
McCahon following a jury’s recommendation for death by a vote of ten to two.
Johnson v. State, 660 So. 2d 648, 652 (Fla. 1995). Both of Johnson’s sentences of
death became final in 1996. Johnson v. Florida, 116 S. Ct. 1550, 1550 (1996);
Johnson v. Florida, 116 S. Ct. 1550, 1551 (1996). Thus, Hurst does not apply
-2-
retroactively to Johnson’s sentences of death. See Hitchcock, 226 So. 3d at 217.
Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Johnson’s motions.
The Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Johnson, we
caution that any rehearing motion containing reargument will be stricken. It is so
ordered.
LABARGA, C.J., and POLSTON, and LAWSON, JJ., concur.
PARIENTE, J., concurs in result with an opinion.
LEWIS and CANADY, JJ., concur in result.
QUINCE, J., recused.
PARIENTE, J., concurring in result.
I concur in result because I recognize that this Court’s opinion in Hitchcock
v. State, 226 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert. denied, 138 S. Ct. 513 (2017), is now
final. However, I continue to adhere to the views expressed in my dissenting
opinion in Hitchcock.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court in and for Sarasota County,
Hunter W. Carroll, Judge - Case Nos. 581988CF003198XXXANC
and 581988CF003199XXXANC
James Vincent Viggiano, Jr., Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, Mark S. Gruber
and Julie A. Morley, Assistant Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, Middle
Region, Temple Terrace, Florida,
for Appellant
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, and Timothy A.
Freeland, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, Florida,
for Appellee
-3-
Emanuel Johnson v. State of Florida &
Combined Opinion