David Joseph Pittman v. State of Florida, 337 So.3d 776

David Joseph Pittman was convicted in 1991 of three first-degree murders (Clarence, Barbara, and their daughter Bonnie), two counts of arson, and grand theft; he received three death sentences affirmed on direct appeal and became final in 1995.
After prior postconviction proceedings, Pittman filed a successive Rule 3.851 motion (amended three times) alleging intellectual disability under Atkins v. Virginia and Hall v. Florida; he also filed a Rule 3.800(a) motion claiming his death sentences are illegal because he never received an evidentiary hearing on that claim.
The circuit court summarily denied the third amended successive motion as untimely and denied the Rule 3.800(a) motion; Pittman appealed.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed, holding Pittman’s intellectual-disability claim untimely because Hall does not apply retroactively under Phillips v. State and, under the post-Atkins version of Rule 3.203, such claims had to be raised by 60 days after October 1, 2004.
The Court also rejected Pittman’s contention that a 2015 IQ score constituted timely newly discovered evidence, applying Dillbeck v. State’s one-year rule and finding the record refuted Pittman’s claim that the evidence could not have been discovered earlier.
The Court summarily rejected, without extended discussion, Pittman’s related procedural arguments about the State’s motion to dismiss and alleged ineffective assistance of prior postconviction counsel.

Issue	Pittman’s Argument	State’s Argument	Held
Timeliness of intellectual-disability claim under Atkins/Hall	Pittman argued he is intellectually disabled and entitled to relief under Atkins and Hall	Hall does not apply retroactively; under Rule 3.203 Pittman had to raise the claim by the 2004 deadline	Denied — claim untimely; Hall not retroactive per Phillips
Legality of death sentences under Rule 3.800(a) for lack of evidentiary hearing	Sentences are illegal because no evidentiary hearing on intellectual-disability claim	Claim depends on untimely 3.851 claim and is therefore not a basis for relief	Denied — dependent on untimely claim
2015 IQ score as newly discovered evidence satisfying one-year requirement	2015 IQ score of 70 is newly discovered and triggers relief	Dillbeck requires filing within one year of discoverability; record shows evidence could have been discovered earlier	Denied — not timely; record refutes nondiscoverability
Procedural claims (court considered State’s motion to dismiss arguments not noticed; ineffective prior postconviction counsel)	Circuit court erred procedurally; prior collateral counsel was ineffective	Court properly ruled; arguments rejected citing Freeman and Sweet	Denied without extended discussion

Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002) (constitutional bar on executing intellectually disabled defendants)
Hall v. Florida, 572 U.S. 701 (2014) (invalidating rigid IQ cutoff for intellectual-disability determination)
Phillips v. State, 299 So. 3d 1013 (Fla. 2020) (Hall does not apply retroactively in Florida)
Dillbeck v. State, 304 So. 3d 286 (Fla. 2020) (newly discovered-evidence timeliness and one-year filing rule)
Pittman v. State, 646 So. 2d 167 (Fla. 1994) (direct appeal affirming convictions and death sentences)
Pittman v. State, 90 So. 3d 794 (Fla. 2011) (postconviction history affirming denial of initial collateral relief)