Louis B. Gaskin, Appellant v. State of Florida, Appellee

Summary

The court affirmed the summary denial of Gaskin’s successive postconviction motion challenging his convictions and death sentences. It held that his improper-doubling claim was untimely and procedurally barred because his judgment became final in 1993 and the claim could have been raised on direct appeal; it also held that Hurst relief was unavailable because his sentence became final before Ring. Justice Pariente and Senior Justice Perry, concurring in part and dissenting in part, would have applied Hurst retroactively, while Justice Pariente would also have granted a new penalty phase because any Hurst error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.