James Armando Card, Sr. v. Julie L. Jones, etc., 219 So. 3d 47

James Armando Card was sentenced to death; the Florida jury recommended death by an 11–1 vote. Card’s conviction and sentence became final when the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari on June 28, 2002.
Card filed a habeas petition in the Florida Supreme Court invoking Hurst v. Florida and Hurst v. State, arguing his nonunanimous jury recommendation and nonunanimous factfinding violated the right to a jury trial.
The Florida Supreme Court has held Hurst applies retroactively to defendants whose sentences became final after Ring v. Arizona; Card’s sentence became final four days after Ring, so Hurst applies to him.
Under Hurst precedent, the State bears the burden to prove any Hurst error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt: a court must be convinced a unanimous jury would have found each aggravator, sufficiency of aggravators, and that aggravators outweigh mitigation.
Because Card’s jury did not make unanimous findings and recommended death 11–1, the Court could not determine whether a unanimous jury would have found the necessary facts; the Court refused to speculate about the lone juror’s reasons.
The Court granted habeas corpus, held the Hurst error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, vacated Card’s death sentence, and remanded for a new penalty phase.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Hurst applies retroactively to Card	Hurst applies retroactively because Card’s sentence became final after Ring	State argued application may be limited	Court: Hurst applies retroactively to Card (final after Ring)
Whether Card’s Hurst error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt	Hurst error was not harmless because jury recommendation was 11–1 and no unanimous factual findings	State must prove harmlessness beyond reasonable doubt	Court: State failed to prove harmlessness; error not harmless
Whether a court can infer unanimous jury findings from record	Card argued court cannot infer unanimity or juror reasoning from record	State implied record might show sufficiency to uphold sentence	Court: Cannot speculate or infer unanimous findings; record insufficient
Remedy when Hurst error not harmless	Card sought relief: vacatur of death sentence and new penalty phase	State likely sought to preserve sentence or limited relief	Court: Vacated death sentence and remanded for new penalty phase

Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016) (holding jury must find the facts necessary to impose death sentence)
Hurst v. State, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016) (applying Hurst and discussing harmless-error allocation to the State)
Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002) (holding aggravating factors necessary for death penalty must be found by a jury)
Mosley v. State, 209 So. 3d 1248 (Fla. 2016) (holding Hurst applies retroactively to defendants whose sentences became final after Ring)
Card v. State, 803 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 2001) (direct appeal decision affirming conviction and death sentence)