Geralds v. State

Annotate this Case

The Supreme Court affirmed the circuit court’s order denying Mark Allen Geralds’ motion filed Geralds Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.851, holding that Geralds was not entitled to relief pursuant to the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Hurst v. Florida, 577 U.S. ___ (2016), and this court’s decision on remand in Hurst v. State (Hurst), 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016). Brown was sentenced to death following a jury’s unanimous recommendation for death. Geralds’ sentence of death became final in 1996. The Supreme Court held that Hurst did not apply retroactively to Geralds’ sentence of death and, accordingly, affirmed the denial of Geralds’ motion.

Download PDF

Supreme Court of Florida ____________ No. SC17-1765 ____________ MARK ALLEN GERALDS, Appellant, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. [February 28, 2018] PER CURIAM. We have for review Mark Allen Geralds’ appeal of the circuit court’s order denying Geralds’ motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. This Court has jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. Geralds’ motion 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). After this Court decided Hitchcock v. State, 226 So. 3d 216 (Fla.), cert. denied, 138 S. Ct. 513 (2017), Geralds responded to this Court’s order to show cause arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in this case. After reviewing Geralds’ response to the order to show cause, as well as the State’s arguments in reply, we conclude that Geralds is not entitled to relief. Geralds was sentenced to death following a jury’s unanimous recommendation for death. Geralds v. State, 674 So. 2d 96, 98 (Fla. 1996). Geralds’ sentence of death became final in 1996. Geralds v. Florida, 519 U.S. 891 (1996). Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to Geralds’ sentence of death. See Hitchcock, 226 So. 3d at 217. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Geralds’ motion. The Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Geralds, we caution that any rehearing motion containing reargument will be stricken. It is so ordered. LABARGA, C.J., and QUINCE, POLSTON, and LAWSON, JJ., concur. PARIENTE, J., concurs in result with an opinion. LEWIS and CANADY, JJ., concur in result. 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 Bay County, Brantley S. Clark, Jr., Judge - Case No. 031989CF000495XXAXMX Linda McDermott of McClain & McDermott, P.A., Estero, Florida, for Appellant -2- Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Lisa A. Hopkins, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, for Appellee -3-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.