Fred Anderson, Jr. v. State of Florida
Fred Anderson, Jr. v. State of Florida
Opinion
Fred Anderson, Jr., a prisoner under sentence of death, appeals the circuit court's order denying his successive motion for postconviction relief, which was filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.
In 1999, a jury convicted Anderson of first-degree murder, attempted first-degree murder, robbery with a firearm, and grand theft of a firearm. After hearing evidence during the penalty phase, the jury unanimously recommended a sentence of death for the first-degree murder by a vote of twelve to zero. We affirmed Anderson's convictions and sentence of death on direct appeal.
Anderson v. State
,
In January 2017, Anderson filed a successive postconviction motion to vacate his death sentence in light of the decision of United States Supreme Court in
Hurst v. Florida
, --- U.S. ----,
Anderson argues the
Hurst
error in his case was not harmless despite the jury's unanimous recommendation for death and that the postconviction court erred in denying his successive motion. As we have previously explained, "a jury's unanimous recommendation of death is 'precisely what we determined in
Hurst
to be constitutionally necessary to impose a sentence of death' because a 'jury unanimously f[inds] all of the necessary facts for the imposition of [a] death sentence[ ] by virtue of its unanimous recommendation[ ].' "
Everett v. State
, 43 Fla. L. Weekly S250, S250, --- So.3d ----, ----,
As previously discussed, Anderson received a unanimous jury recommendation of death. Neither the jury instructions provided in this case, nor the aggravators and mitigators found by the trial court, nor the facts of the case compel departing from our precedent. We conclude any Hurst error in this case was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and Anderson is therefore not entitled to relief.
Anderson also contends that a unanimous jury recommendation violates the Eighth Amendment pursuant to
Caldwell v. Mississippi
,
Accordingly, because we conclude any Hurst error in this case was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and the remaining claims are similarly without merit, we affirm the postconviction court's order denying Anderson's successive motion for postconviction relief.
It is so ordered.
PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, POLSTON, LABARGA, and LAWSON, JJ., concur.
CANADY, C.J., concurs in result.
We likewise reject Anderson's argument that he is entitled to a new proportionality analysis with respect to his death sentence.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Fred ANDERSON, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
- Status
- Published