Trease v. State

Annotate this Case

The Supreme Court withdrew its opinion issued on January 24, 2018 in this case and substituted this opinion in its place, holding that the circuit court properly denied Appellant’s motion filed pursuant to Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.851.

Appellant’s motion sought relief pursuant to Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016), and this court’s decision on remand in Hurst v. State, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016). The Supreme Court held that Appellant’s valid waiver of postconviction proceedings and counsel in 2008 precluded him from claiming a right to relief under Hurst. Moreover, even if Appellant’s postconviction waiver did not preclude him from raising a Hurst claim, Hurst would not apply retroactively to Appellant’s sentence of death.

Download PDF

Supreme Court of Florida ____________ No. SC17-686 ____________ ROBERT J. TREASE, Appellant, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. [April 26, 2018] PER CURIAM. We have for review Robert J. Trease’s appeal of the circuit court’s order denying Trease’s motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. This Court has jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. We withdraw the opinion issued on January 24, 2018, and substitute this opinion in its place. Trease’s 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, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016), cert. denied, 137 S. Ct. 2161 (2017). This Court stayed Trease’s appeal pending the disposition of Hitchcock v. State, 226 So. 3d 216 (Fla.), cert. denied, 138 S. Ct. 513 (2017). After this Court decided Hitchcock, Trease responded to this Court’s order to show cause arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in this case. Then, after this Court decided State v. Silvia, 235 So. 3d 349 (Fla. 2018), Trease responded to this Court’s order to show cause why Silvia should not be dispositive in this case. After reviewing Trease’s responses to the orders to show cause, as well as the State’s arguments in reply, we conclude that Trease’s valid waiver of postconviction proceedings and counsel in 2008 precludes him from claiming a right to relief under Hurst. See Silvia, 235 So. 3d at 351; Trease v. State, 41 So. 3d 119 (Fla. 2010). Moreover, Trease’s sentence of death became final in 2001. Trease v. State, 768 So. 2d 1050, 1053 (Fla. 2000). Thus, even if Trease’s postconviction waiver did not preclude him from raising a Hurst claim, Hurst would not apply retroactively to Trease’s sentence of death. See Hitchcock, 226 So. 3d at 217. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of relief. It is so ordered. LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, QUINCE, POLSTON, and LAWSON, JJ., concur. LEWIS, J., dissents. CANADY, J., recused. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED. An Appeal from the Circuit Court in and for Sarasota County, Rochelle Curley, Judge - Case No. 581995CF002207XXXANC Mark E. Olive, Tallahassee, Florida, -2- for Appellant Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, and Stephen D. Ake, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, 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.