& SC16-1279 Robert Earl Peterson v. State of Florida and Robert Earl Peterson v. Julie L. Jones, etc., 221 So. 3d 571

Peterson was convicted of first-degree murder and evidence tampering for killing his stepfather; jury recommended death 7–5 and sentence became final in 2012.
Guilt-phase evidence included Peterson’s precrime threats, surveillance footage, hat found at scene, incriminating taped admissions to acquaintance Jimmie Jackson, and medical examiner testimony of blunt force trauma and contact gunshot wounds.
At penalty phase the trial court found three aggravators (CCP, HAC, pecuniary gain), limited nonstatutory mitigation, and imposed death.
Peterson filed a Rule 3.851 postconviction motion raising multiple claims (lost/destroyed trial records, ineffective assistance, Brady, Ake, judicial bias/recusal, Hurst challenge, etc.).
After an evidentiary hearing on several claims the postconviction court denied relief; Peterson appealed and filed a separate habeas petition.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed denial of postconviction relief as to guilt-phase claims, denied habeas, but vacated the death sentence and remanded for a new penalty phase under Hurst because the jury’s 7–5 death recommendation and lack of unanimous findings were not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Peterson)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Motion to recuse postconviction judge	Prior judicial comments about mitigation coordinators showed bias so judge should be disqualified	Motion legally insufficient; comments were in other cases and did not create reasonable fear of unfair hearing	Denied—motion legally insufficient; court did not exceed scope by adjudicating truth of allegations
Lost/destroyed trial records; due process	Loss of trial counsel’s files impaired collateral review and showed conflict of interest / per se ineffectiveness	Files were duplicative; appellant failed to identify missing materials or show prejudice	Denied—no showing that loss impaired ability to mount meaningful defense or caused prejudice
Ineffective assistance (guilt phase) — alleged conflict and failure to establish attorney‑client relationship	Fletcher’s heavy caseload and limited visits created actual conflict and deficient representation	Arguments speculative, no specific deficient acts alleged, no showing of prejudice; Cronic inapplicable	Denied—claims speculative, did not meet Strickland/Cronic standards
Hurst challenge; need for unanimous jury findings for death	Hurst requires jury, not judge, to find facts necessary for death; 7–5 recommendation means no unanimous findings	State must prove error harmless beyond reasonable doubt	Grant relief as to penalty—death sentence vacated; remand for new penalty phase because error not harmless beyond reasonable doubt

Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (U.S. 2016) (Sixth Amendment requires jury to find facts necessary to impose death)
Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (U.S. 2002) (jury must find aggravating factors supporting death sentence)
Mosley v. State, 209 So.3d 1248 (Fla. 2016) (Hurst retroactivity and requirement of unanimous jury findings)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (ineffective assistance two‑prong standard)
Cronic v. United States, 466 U.S. 648 (U.S. 1984) (circumstances where prejudice is presumed)
Jones v. State, 928 So.2d 1178 (Fla. 2006) (lost counsel records and prejudice standard)
Peterson v. State, 94 So.3d 514 (Fla. 2012) (direct appeal affirming conviction and sentence)