Paul Durousseau v. State of Florida

Summary

The Supreme Court of Florida affirmed the denial of Paul Durousseau’s postconviction claims alleging ineffective assistance of counsel during voir dire. The court held that his death sentence violated the Sixth Amendment under Hurst v. Florida and Hurst v. State, and that the error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The court vacated the death sentence and remanded for a new penalty phase.

Holdings

1. Durousseau failed to establish ineffective assistance of counsel because his allegations concerning additional voir dire questioning, jury strikes, and juror challenges were speculative and he did not identify actual bias or a better-qualified replacement juror.
2. Durousseau's death sentence was unconstitutional because it was imposed without the jury unanimously finding every fact necessary for imposition of death, as required by the Sixth Amendment and Florida's independent right to jury trial.
3. The Hurst violation was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and Durousseau was entitled to a new penalty phase.
4. Section 775.082(2), Florida Statutes, did not require immediate resentencing to life imprisonment; the proper remedy was a new penalty phase.

Questions Presented

1. Whether trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance during voir dire by relying primarily on collective questioning, failing to conduct additional questioning, failing to exhaust or request additional peremptory challenges, and failing to challenge certain jurors.
2. Whether Durousseau's death sentence violated Hurst v. Florida and Hurst v. State because the jury did not unanimously find every fact necessary to impose death.
3. Whether any Hurst error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
4. Whether section 775.082(2), Florida Statutes, required resentencing to life imprisonment rather than a new penalty phase.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded