Steven Anthony Cozzie, Appellant v. State of Florida, Appellee — Quince, J., Concurring in Part and Dissenting in Part

Summary

Justice Quince concurs that the evidence is sufficient to sustain Cozzie’s convictions but dissents from the majority’s conclusion that the Hurst error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, arguing that Hurst requires a jury, not a judge, to find each aggravating factor and therefore the error is harmful. The opinion focuses on the proper harmless‑error review and the need for jury fact‑finding on aggravators. Separate concurring opinions address the admissibility of remorse testimony and the necessity of a harmless‑error analysis.