concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I agree with the majority’s decision to affirm Morris’s convictions of two counts of first-degree murder. I dissent, however, to the decision to affirm Morris’s sentences and would find that the Hurst error in this *47case was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. As I’ve stated previously, “[bjecause Hurst ‘requires a jury, not a judge, to find each fact necessary to impose a sentence of death,’ the error cannot be harmless where such a factual determination was not made.” Hall v. State, 212 So.3d 1001, 1037, 2017 WL 626509 at *24 (Fla. 2017) (Quince, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part) (quoting Hurst v. Florida, — U.S. -, 136 S.Ct. 616, 619, 193 L.E.d.2d 504 (2016)); see also Truehill v. State, 211 So.3d 930, 961-62 (Fla. 2017).