Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 921.141 (2025)

Sentence of death or life imprisonment for capital felonies; further proceedings to determine sentence.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

921.141 Sentence of death or life imprisonment for capital felonies; further proceedings to determine sentence.—

(1) SEPARATE PROCEEDINGS ON ISSUE OF PENALTY.—Upon conviction or adjudication of guilt of a defendant of a capital felony, the court shall conduct a separate sentencing proceeding to determine whether the defendant should be sentenced to death or life imprisonment as authorized by s. 775.082. The proceeding shall be conducted by the trial judge before the trial jury as soon as practicable. If, through impossibility or inability, the trial jury is unable to reconvene for a hearing on the issue of penalty, having determined the guilt of the accused, the trial judge may summon a special juror or jurors as provided in chapter 913 to determine the issue of the imposition of the penalty. If the trial jury has been waived, or if the defendant pleaded guilty, the sentencing proceeding shall be conducted before a jury impaneled for that purpose, unless waived by the defendant. In the proceeding, evidence may be presented as to any matter that the court deems relevant to the nature of the crime and the character of the defendant and shall include matters relating to any of the aggravating factors enumerated in subsection (6) and for which notice has been provided pursuant to s. 782.04(1)(b) or mitigating circumstances enumerated in subsection (7). Any such evidence that the court deems to have probative value may be received, regardless of its admissibility under the exclusionary rules of evidence, provided the defendant is accorded a fair opportunity to rebut any hearsay statements. However, this subsection shall not be construed to authorize the introduction of any evidence secured in violation of the Constitution of the United States or the Constitution of the State of Florida. The state and the defendant or the defendant’s counsel shall be permitted to present argument for or against sentence of death.

(2) FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDED SENTENCE BY THE JURY.—This subsection applies only if the defendant has not waived his or her right to a sentencing proceeding by a jury.

(a) After hearing all of the evidence presented regarding aggravating factors and mitigating circumstances, the jury shall deliberate and determine if the state has proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, the existence of at least one aggravating factor set forth in subsection (6).

(b) The jury shall return findings identifying each aggravating factor found to exist. A finding that an aggravating factor exists must be unanimous. If the jury:

1. Does not unanimously find at least one aggravating factor, the defendant is ineligible for a sentence of death.

2. Unanimously finds at least one aggravating factor, the defendant is eligible for a sentence of death and the jury shall make a recommendation to the court as to whether the defendant shall be sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole or to death. The recommendation shall be based on a weighing of all of the following:

a. Whether sufficient aggravating factors exist.

b. Whether aggravating factors exist which outweigh the mitigating circumstances found to exist.

c. Based on the considerations in sub-subparagraphs a. and b., whether the defendant should be sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole or to death.

(c) If at least eight jurors determine that the defendant should be sentenced to death, the jury’s recommendation to the court must be a sentence of death. If fewer than eight jurors determine that the defendant should be sentenced to death, the jury’s recommendation to the court must be a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.

(3) IMPOSITION OF SENTENCE OF LIFE IMPRISONMENT OR DEATH.—

(a) If the jury has recommended a sentence of:

1. Life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, the court shall impose the recommended sentence of life.

2. Death, and at least eight jurors recommend a sentence of death, the court, after considering each aggravating factor found by the jury and all mitigating circumstances, may impose a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole or a sentence of death. The court may consider only an aggravating factor that was unanimously found to exist by the jury. The court may impose a sentence of death only if the jury unanimously finds at least one aggravating factor beyond a reasonable doubt.

(b) If the defendant waived his or her right to a sentencing proceeding by a jury, the court, after considering all aggravating factors and mitigating circumstances, may impose a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole or a sentence of death. The court may impose a sentence of death only if the court finds that at least one aggravating factor has been proven to exist beyond a reasonable doubt.

(4) ORDER OF THE COURT IN SUPPORT OF SENTENCE OF LIFE IMPRISONMENT OR DEATH.—In each case in which the court imposes a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole or death, the court shall, considering the records of the trial and the sentencing proceedings, enter a written order addressing the aggravating factors set forth in subsection (6) found to exist, the mitigating circumstances in subsection (7) reasonably established by the evidence, whether there are sufficient aggravating factors to warrant the death penalty, and whether the aggravating factors outweigh the mitigating circumstances reasonably established by the evidence. The court must include in its written order the reasons for not accepting the jury’s recommended sentence, if applicable. If the court does not issue its order requiring the death sentence within 30 days after the rendition of the judgment and sentence, the court shall impose a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole in accordance with s. 775.082.

(5) REVIEW OF JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE.—The judgment of conviction and sentence of death shall be subject to automatic review by the Supreme Court of Florida and disposition rendered within 2 years after the filing of a notice of appeal. Such review by the Supreme Court shall have priority over all other cases and shall be heard in accordance with rules adopted by the Supreme Court.

(6) AGGRAVATING FACTORS.—Aggravating factors shall be limited to the following:

(a) The capital felony was committed by a person previously convicted of a felony and under sentence of imprisonment or placed on community control or on felony probation.

(b) The defendant was previously convicted of another capital felony or of a felony involving the use or threat of violence to the person.

(d) The capital felony was committed while the defendant was engaged, or was an accomplice, in the commission of, or an attempt to commit, or flight after committing or attempting to commit, any: robbery; sexual battery; aggravated child abuse; abuse of an elderly person or disabled adult resulting in great bodily harm, permanent disability, or permanent disfigurement; arson; burglary; kidnapping; aircraft piracy; or unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb.

(e) The capital felony was committed for the purpose of avoiding or preventing a lawful arrest or effecting an escape from custody.

(f) The capital felony was committed for pecuniary gain.

(g) The capital felony was committed to disrupt or hinder the lawful exercise of any governmental function or the enforcement of laws.

(h) The capital felony was especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel.

(i) The capital felony was a homicide and was committed in a cold, calculated, and premeditated manner without any pretense of moral or legal justification.

(j) The victim of the capital felony was a law enforcement officer engaged in the performance of his or her official duties.

(k) The victim of the capital felony was an elected or appointed public official engaged in the performance of his or her official duties if the motive for the capital felony was related, in whole or in part, to the victim’s official capacity.

(l) The victim of the capital felony was a person less than 12 years of age.

(m) The victim of the capital felony was particularly vulnerable due to advanced age or disability, or because the defendant stood in a position of familial or custodial authority over the victim.

(n) The capital felony was committed by a criminal gang member, as defined in s. 874.03.

(o) The capital felony was committed by a person designated as a sexual predator pursuant to s. 775.21 or a person previously designated as a sexual predator who had the sexual predator designation removed.

(p) The capital felony was committed by a person subject to an injunction issued pursuant to s. 741.30 or s. 784.046, or a foreign protection order accorded full faith and credit pursuant to s. 741.315, and was committed against the petitioner who obtained the injunction or protection order or any spouse, child, sibling, or parent of the petitioner.

(q) The victim of the capital felony was gathered with one or more persons for a school activity, religious activity, or public government meeting.

(r) The capital felony was committed against the head of a state, including, but not limited to, the President or the Vice President of the United States or the Governor of this or another state, or in an attempt to commit such crime a capital felony was committed against another individual.

(7) MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES.—Mitigating circumstances shall be the following:

(a) The defendant has no significant history of prior criminal activity.

(b) The capital felony was committed while the defendant was under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance.

(d) The defendant was an accomplice in the capital felony committed by another person and his or her participation was relatively minor.

(e) The defendant acted under extreme duress or under the substantial domination of another person.

(f) The capacity of the defendant to appreciate the criminality of his or her conduct or to conform his or her conduct to the requirements of law was substantially impaired.

(g) The age of the defendant at the time of the crime.

(h) The existence of any other factors in the defendant’s background that would mitigate against imposition of the death penalty.

(8) VICTIM IMPACT EVIDENCE.—Once the prosecution has provided evidence of the existence of one or more aggravating factors as described in subsection (6), the prosecution may introduce, and subsequently argue, victim impact evidence to the jury. Such evidence shall be designed to demonstrate the victim’s uniqueness as an individual human being and the resultant loss to the community’s members by the victim’s death. Characterizations and opinions about the crime, the defendant, and the appropriate sentence shall not be permitted as a part of victim impact evidence.

(9) APPLICABILITY.—This section does not apply to a person convicted or adjudicated guilty of a capital sexual battery under s. 794.011, a capital human trafficking of vulnerable persons for sexual exploitation under s. 787.06(5), or a capital drug trafficking felony under s. 893.135.

History.—s. 237a, ch. 19554, 1939; CGL 1940 Supp. 8663(246); s. 119, ch. 70-339; s. 1, ch. 72-72; s. 9, ch. 72-724; s. 1, ch. 74-379; s. 248, ch. 77-104; s. 1, ch. 77-174; s. 1, ch. 79-353; s. 177, ch. 83-216; s. 1, ch. 87-368; s. 10, ch. 88-381; s. 3, ch. 90-112; s. 1, ch. 91-270; s. 1, ch. 92-81; s. 1, ch. 95-159; s. 5, ch. 96-290; s. 1, ch. 96-302; s. 7, ch. 2005-28; s. 2, ch. 2005-64; s. 27, ch. 2008-238; s. 25, ch. 2010-117; s. 1, ch. 2010-120; s. 3, ch. 2016-13; s. 49, ch. 2016-24; s. 1, ch. 2017-1; s. 129, ch. 2019-167; s. 1, ch. 2023-23; s. 4, ch. 2023-25; s. 1, ch. 2025-79; s. 1, ch. 2025-138; s. 16, ch. 2025-156.

Note.—Former s. 919.23.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1,565 cases (70 in the last 5 years), 1972–2026 · leading case: Larry Darnell Perry v. State of Florida, 210 So. 3d 630 (Fla. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Larry Darnell Perry v. State of Florida, 210 So. 3d 630 (Fla. 2016). · cites it 85× “Section 3 contains the most substantial changes, significantly amending section 921.141, Florida Statutes. Ch. 2016-13, § 3.”

State v. Dixon, 283 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1973). · cites it 63× “These cases pose several questions arising from the possibility of the imposition of the penalty of death pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 921.141 , F.S.A., which became effective December 8, 1972.”

Khadafy Kareem Mullens v. State of Florida, 197 So. 3d 16 (Fla. 2016). · cites it 29× “The court also found that Mullens’s capacity to appreciáte the criminality of his conduct or conform his conduct to the requirements of the law was substantially -impaired, section 921.141 (6)(f), and assigned it moderate weight.”

Fitzpatrick v. State, 900 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 2005). · cites it 35× “Here, the trial court found four aggravating factors: (1) Fitzpatrick was under sentence of imprisonment, conditional/control release, when the murder in this case was committed (great weight), see § 921.141(5)(a), Fla. Stat. (2001); (2) Fitzpatrick had previously been convicted…”

Miller v. State, 42 So. 3d 204 (Fla. 2010). · cites it 48× “See § 921.141(1), Fla. Stat. (2006); Delap, 440 So.”

Timothy Lee Hurst v. State of Florida, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016). · cites it 36× “Section 921.141, Florida Statutes (2012), provided in pertinent part as follows: (1) SEPARATE PROCEEDINGS ON ISSUE OF PENALTY.”

Smith v. State, 28 So. 3d 838 (Fla. 2009). · cites it 51× “Second, after hearing the evidence and argument, the trial judge should then recess the proceeding to consider the appropriate sentence.”

Bottoson v. Moore, 833 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 2002). · cites it 28× “And in a capital case, the trial judge must follow the sentencing procedures outlined in section 921.141, Florida Statutes (2001).”

Mark James Asay v. State of Florida, SC16-102 Mark James Asay v. Julie L. Jones, etc. & SC16-628 Mark James Asay v. Julie L. Jones, etc., 210 So. 3d 1 (Fla. 2016). · cites it 18× “Fla. Stat. § 921.141 (1) (2010). Next, the jury renders an “advisory sentence” of life or death without specifying the factual basis of its recommendation.”

State v. Steele, 921 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 2006). · cites it 34× “2004); § 921.141, Fla. Stat. (2004); Mont.Code Ann.”

Peek v. State, 395 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 1981). · cites it 37× “[2] Section 921.141(1), Florida Statutes (1977), provides that during the sentencing proceeding, "evidence may be presented as to any matter that the court deems relevant to sentence.”

Rigterink v. State, 66 So. 3d 866 (Fla. 2011). · cites it 31× “3] § 921.141 (5)(b), Fla. Stat. (2003). N.4] § 921.”

Show all 1,565 citing cases →

— 921.141(1) — 162 cases

Khadafy Kareem Mullens v. State of Florida, 197 So. 3d 16 (Fla. 2016). “The court also found that Mullens’s capacity to appreciáte the criminality of his conduct or conform his conduct to the requirements of the law was substantially -impaired, section 921.141 (6)(f), and assigned it moderate weight.”

Rodriguez v. State, 753 So. 2d 29 (Fla. 2000).

Miller v. State, 42 So. 3d 204 (Fla. 2010). “See § 921.141(1), Fla. Stat. (2006); Delap, 440 So.”

Franklin v. State, 965 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 2007).

Perry v. State, 801 So. 2d 78 (Fla. 2001).

— 921.141(14) — 1 case

State v. Tibbs, 370 So. 2d 386 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979).

— 921.141(2) — 71 cases

Larry Darnell Perry v. State of Florida, 210 So. 3d 630 (Fla. 2016). “Section 3 contains the most substantial changes, significantly amending section 921.141, Florida Statutes. Ch. 2016-13, § 3.”

State v. Mason (Slip Opinion), 2018 Ohio 1462 (Ohio 2018).

Bottoson v. Moore, 833 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 2002). “And in a capital case, the trial judge must follow the sentencing procedures outlined in section 921.141, Florida Statutes (2001).”

Reynolds v. State, 934 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 2006).

State v. Mason, 2016 Ohio 8400 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016).

— 921.141(2)(a) — 16 cases

Ault v. State, 53 So. 3d 175 (Fla. 2010).

State v. Steele, 921 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 2006). “2004); § 921.141, Fla. Stat. (2004); Mont.Code Ann.”

Anderson v. State, 18 So. 3d 501 (Fla. 2009).

Muhammad v. State, 782 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 2001).

— 921.141(2)(b) — 25 cases

In Re: Stand. Crim. Jury Instructions in Capital Cases, 214 So. 3d 1236 (Fla. 2017).

Ault v. State, 53 So. 3d 175 (Fla. 2010).

Caraballo v. State, 39 So. 3d 1234 (Fla. 2010).

State v. Steele, 921 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 2006). “2004); § 921.141, Fla. Stat. (2004); Mont.Code Ann.”

— 921.141(2)(c) — 18 cases

& SC16-2133 Patrick Albert Evans v. State of Florida & Juan Rosario v. State of Florida, 213 So. 3d 856 (Fla. 2017).

State v. Ballard, 956 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007).

Douglas v. Wainwright, 714 F.2d 1532 (11th Cir. 1983).

State of Florida Vs Troy Victorino & Jerone Hunter (Fla. 5th DCA 2023).

— 921.141(3) — 130 cases

Miller v. State, 42 So. 3d 204 (Fla. 2010). “See § 921.141(1), Fla. Stat. (2006); Delap, 440 So.”

Timothy Lee Hurst v. State of Florida, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016). “Section 921.141, Florida Statutes (2012), provided in pertinent part as follows: (1) SEPARATE PROCEEDINGS ON ISSUE OF PENALTY.”

Bottoson v. Moore, 833 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 2002). “And in a capital case, the trial judge must follow the sentencing procedures outlined in section 921.141, Florida Statutes (2001).”

Mark James Asay v. State of Florida, SC16-102 Mark James Asay v. Julie L. Jones, etc. & SC16-628 Mark James Asay v. Julie L. Jones, etc., 210 So. 3d 1 (Fla. 2016). “Fla. Stat. § 921.141 (1) (2010). Next, the jury renders an “advisory sentence” of life or death without specifying the factual basis of its recommendation.”

— 921.141(3)(a) — 12 cases

John F. Mosley v. State of Florida & SC14-2108 John F. Mosley v. Julie L. Jones, etc., 209 So. 3d 1248 (Fla. 2016).

Kenneth R. Jackson v. State of Florida, 213 So. 3d 754 (Fla. 2017).

Duest v. State, 855 So. 2d 33 (Fla. 2003).

Ellerbee v. State, 87 So. 3d 730 (Fla. 2012).

— 921.141(3)(b) — 7 cases

Purdy v. State, 343 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 1977).

State of Florida v. Mark Anthony Poole (Fla. 2020).

Jonathan Huey Lawrence v. State of Florida (Fla. 2020).

Robert Craft v. State of Florida (Fla. 2020).

Robert Craft v. State of Florida (Fla. 2021).

— 921.141(4) — 84 cases

Allstate Ins. Co. v. Orthopedic Specialists, etc., 212 So. 3d 973 (Fla. 2017).

James Robertson v. State of Florida, 143 So. 3d 907 (Fla. 2014).

Bottoson v. Moore, 833 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 2002). “And in a capital case, the trial judge must follow the sentencing procedures outlined in section 921.141, Florida Statutes (2001).”

Hamblen v. State, 527 So. 2d 800 (Fla. 1988).

Robinson v. State, 373 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 1979).

— 921.141(4)(b) — 1 case

James Ernest Hitchcock v. Louie L. Wainwright, 745 F.2d 1332 (11th Cir. 1985).

— 921.141(5) — 146 cases

Miller v. State, 42 So. 3d 204 (Fla. 2010). “See § 921.141(1), Fla. Stat. (2006); Delap, 440 So.”

Smith v. State, 28 So. 3d 838 (Fla. 2009). “Second, after hearing the evidence and argument, the trial judge should then recess the proceeding to consider the appropriate sentence.”

In Re Stand. Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases—Report No. 2005-2, 22 So. 3d 17 (Fla. 2009).

Rogers v. State, 957 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 2007).

Provence v. State, 337 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 1976).

— 921.141(5)(1) — 2 cases

Jeffrey Glenn Hutchinson v. State of Florida, 243 So. 3d 880 (Fla. 2018).

Hutchinson v. State, 882 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 2004).

— 921.141(5)(B) — 1 case

Kaczmar v. State, 104 So. 3d 990 (Fla. 2012).

— 921.141(5)(I) — 1 case

Shere v. Moore, 830 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2002).

— 921.141(5)(Z) — 1 case

Smith v. State, 28 So. 3d 838 (Fla. 2009). “Second, after hearing the evidence and argument, the trial judge should then recess the proceeding to consider the appropriate sentence.”

— 921.141(5)(a) — 99 cases

Fitzpatrick v. State, 900 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 2005). “Here, the trial court found four aggravating factors: (1) Fitzpatrick was under sentence of imprisonment, conditional/control release, when the murder in this case was committed (great weight), see § 921.141(5)(a), Fla. Stat. (2001); (2) Fitzpatrick had previously been convicted…”

Williams v. State, 707 So. 2d 683 (Fla. 1998).

Trotter v. State, 576 So. 2d 691 (Fla. 1990).

Peek v. State, 395 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 1981). “[2] Section 921.141(1), Florida Statutes (1977), provides that during the sentencing proceeding, "evidence may be presented as to any matter that the court deems relevant to sentence.”

Marvin Cannon v. State of Florida, 180 So. 3d 1023 (Fla. 2015).

— 921.141(5)(a)(b)(c) — 1 case

Buford v. State, 403 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 1981).

— 921.141(5)(b) — 293 cases

Carpenter v. State, 785 So. 2d 1182 (Fla. 2001).

Green v. State, 975 So. 2d 1090 (Fla. 2008).

Elledge v. State, 346 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 1977).

McCrae v. State, 395 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 1981).

— 921.141(5)(c) — 38 cases

Mines v. State, 390 So. 2d 332 (Fla. 1980).

Jackson v. State, 599 So. 2d 103 (Fla. 1992).

Elledge v. State, 346 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 1977).

Coney v. State, 653 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 1995).

Lucas v. State, 376 So. 2d 1149 (Fla. 1979).

— 921.141(5)(d) — 227 cases

Smith v. State, 28 So. 3d 838 (Fla. 2009). “Second, after hearing the evidence and argument, the trial judge should then recess the proceeding to consider the appropriate sentence.”

Brooks v. State, 918 So. 2d 181 (Fla. 2005).

McWatters v. State, 36 So. 3d 613 (Fla. 2010).

— 921.141(5)(e) — 119 cases

Rigterink v. State, 66 So. 3d 866 (Fla. 2011). “3] § 921.141 (5)(b), Fla. Stat. (2003). N.4] § 921.”

Fotopoulos v. State, 608 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 1992).

Wright v. State, 19 So. 3d 277 (Fla. 2009).

Smith v. State, 28 So. 3d 838 (Fla. 2009). “Second, after hearing the evidence and argument, the trial judge should then recess the proceeding to consider the appropriate sentence.”

— 921.141(5)(f) — 101 cases

Bradley v. State, 787 So. 2d 732 (Fla. 2001).

Craig v. State, 510 So. 2d 857 (Fla. 1987).

Perez v. State, 919 So. 2d 347 (Fla. 2006).

Twilegar v. State, 42 So. 3d 177 (Fla. 2010).

— 921.141(5)(g) — 31 cases

Shere v. State, 579 So. 2d 86 (Fla. 1991).

Jackson v. State, 648 So. 2d 85 (Fla. 1994).

Jones v. State, 440 So. 2d 570 (Fla. 1983).

Shere v. Moore, 830 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2002).

Peterka v. State, 640 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 1994).

— 921.141(5)(h) — 224 cases

Rigterink v. State, 66 So. 3d 866 (Fla. 2011). “3] § 921.141 (5)(b), Fla. Stat. (2003). N.4] § 921.”

Rose v. State, 787 So. 2d 786 (Fla. 2001).

Victorino v. State, 23 So. 3d 87 (Fla. 2009).

Baker v. State, 71 So. 3d 802 (Fla. 2011).

Smith v. State, 28 So. 3d 838 (Fla. 2009). “Second, after hearing the evidence and argument, the trial judge should then recess the proceeding to consider the appropriate sentence.”

— 921.141(5)(i) — 178 cases

Combs v. State, 403 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 1981).

Porter v. State, 564 So. 2d 1060 (Fla. 1990).

Jent v. State, 408 So. 2d 1024 (Fla. 1981).

Fotopoulos v. State, 608 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 1992).

Smith v. State, 28 So. 3d 838 (Fla. 2009). “Second, after hearing the evidence and argument, the trial judge should then recess the proceeding to consider the appropriate sentence.”

— 921.141(5)(j) — 13 cases

Jackson v. State, 648 So. 2d 85 (Fla. 1994).

San Martin v. State, 717 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 1998).

Escobar v. State, 699 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 1997).

In Re Stan. Jury Instr. in Crim. Cases, 543 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 1989).

Sims v. State, 681 So. 2d 1112 (Fla. 1996).

— 921.141(5)(k) — 2 cases

State v. Steele, 921 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 2006). “2004); § 921.141, Fla. Stat. (2004); Mont.Code Ann.”

In Re Stan. Jury Instr. in Crim. Cases, 543 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 1989).

— 921.141(5)(l) — 3 cases

Smith v. State, 28 So. 3d 838 (Fla. 2009). “Second, after hearing the evidence and argument, the trial judge should then recess the proceeding to consider the appropriate sentence.”

Joseph P. Smith v. State of Florida, 151 So. 3d 1177 (Fla. 2014).

State of Florida v. Joseph P. Smith, 251 So. 3d 807 (Fla. 2018).

— 921.141(5)(m) — 12 cases

Morrison v. State, 818 So. 2d 432 (Fla. 2002).

State v. Hootman, 709 So. 2d 1357 (Fla. 1998).

Woodel v. State, 804 So. 2d 316 (Fla. 2001).

Smith v. State, 28 So. 3d 838 (Fla. 2009). “Second, after hearing the evidence and argument, the trial judge should then recess the proceeding to consider the appropriate sentence.”

Edward Allen Covington v. State of Florida, 228 So. 3d 49 (Fla. 2017).

— 921.141(5)(n) — 1 case

State v. Steele, 921 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 2006). “2004); § 921.141, Fla. Stat. (2004); Mont.Code Ann.”

— 921.141(5)(o) — 1 case

In Re Stand. Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases—Report No. 2005-2, 22 So. 3d 17 (Fla. 2009).

— 921.141(6) — 113 cases

In Re Stand. Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases—Report No. 2005-2, 22 So. 3d 17 (Fla. 2009).

Ford v. State, 802 So. 2d 1121 (Fla. 2001).

Jones v. State, 332 So. 2d 615 (Fla. 1976).

& SC14-2278 Charles Grover Brant v. State of Florida & Charles Grover Brant v. Julie L. Jones, etc., 197 So. 3d 1051 (Fla. 2016).

Braddy v. State, 111 So. 3d 810 (Fla. 2012).

— 921.141(6)(a) — 81 cases

Rigterink v. State, 66 So. 3d 866 (Fla. 2011). “3] § 921.141 (5)(b), Fla. Stat. (2003). N.4] § 921.”

Smith v. State, 407 So. 2d 894 (Fla. 1981).

Timothy Lee Hurst v. State of Florida, 147 So. 3d 435 (Fla. 2014).

Timothy Lee Hurst v. State of Florida, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016). “Section 921.141, Florida Statutes (2012), provided in pertinent part as follows: (1) SEPARATE PROCEEDINGS ON ISSUE OF PENALTY.”

— 921.141(6)(b) — 169 cases

Kilgore v. State, 55 So. 3d 487 (Fla. 2010).

Rogers v. State, 783 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 2001).

Victorino v. State, 23 So. 3d 87 (Fla. 2009).

Ault v. State, 53 So. 3d 175 (Fla. 2010).

Duest v. State, 855 So. 2d 33 (Fla. 2003).

— 921.141(6)(b)(f) — 1 case

Porter v. State, 788 So. 2d 917 (Fla. 2001).

— 921.141(6)(c) — 12 cases

Duest v. State, 855 So. 2d 33 (Fla. 2003).

Brooks v. State, 762 So. 2d 879 (Fla. 2000).

State v. Dixon, 283 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1973). “These cases pose several questions arising from the possibility of the imposition of the penalty of death pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 921.141 , F.S.A., which became effective December 8, 1972.”

Buford v. State, 403 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 1981).

— 921.141(6)(d) — 21 cases

White v. State, 817 So. 2d 799 (Fla. 2002).

White v. State, 403 So. 2d 331 (Fla. 1981).

Merck v. State, 124 So. 3d 785 (Fla. 2013).

Hitchcock v. State, 866 So. 2d 23 (Fla. 2004).

— 921.141(6)(e) — 36 cases

Cooper v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr., 646 F.3d 1328 (11th Cir. 2011).

Morris v. State, 931 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 2006).

Windom v. State, 656 So. 2d 432 (Fla. 1995).

Hargrave v. State, 366 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1978).

— 921.141(6)(e)(f)(g) — 2 cases

Meeks v. State, 339 So. 2d 186 (Fla. 1976).

Johnson v. State, 399 So. 2d 859 (Ala. Crim. App. 1979).

— 921.141(6)(f) — 105 cases

Kilgore v. State, 55 So. 3d 487 (Fla. 2010).

Rogers v. State, 783 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 2001).

Ault v. State, 53 So. 3d 175 (Fla. 2010).

Oyola v. State, 99 So. 3d 431 (Fla. 2012).

— 921.141(6)(g) — 63 cases

Ellis v. State, 622 So. 2d 991 (Fla. 1993).

Timothy Lee Hurst v. State of Florida, 147 So. 3d 435 (Fla. 2014).

Tavares David Calloway v. State of Florida, 210 So. 3d 1160 (Fla. 2017).

— 921.141(6)(h) — 37 cases

Braddy v. State, 111 So. 3d 810 (Fla. 2012).

Timothy Lee Hurst v. State of Florida, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016). “Section 921.141, Florida Statutes (2012), provided in pertinent part as follows: (1) SEPARATE PROCEEDINGS ON ISSUE OF PENALTY.”

Overton v. State, 801 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 2001).

Buzia v. State, 926 So. 2d 1203 (Fla. 2006).

— 921.141(6)(i) — 5 cases

James Terry Colley, Jr. v. State of Florida (Fla. 2020).

Shawn Rogers v. State of Florida (Fla. 2019).

Angel Santiago-Gonzalez v. State of Florida (Fla. 2020).

Wayne C. Doty v. State of Florida (Fla. 2020).

— 921.141(6)(m) — 2 cases

Edward Allen Covington v. State of Florida, 228 So. 3d 49 (Fla. 2017).

John Sexton v. State of Florida (Fla. 2024).

— 921.141(6Xa) — 1 case

Alvord v. Wainwright, 725 F.2d 1282 (11th Cir. 1984).

— 921.141(7) — 80 cases

Looney v. State, 803 So. 2d 656 (Fla. 2001).

Card v. State, 803 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 2001).

Windom v. State, 656 So. 2d 432 (Fla. 1995).

Hernandez v. State, 4 So. 3d 642 (Fla. 2009).

Franklin v. State, 965 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 2007).

— 921.141(7)(a) — 7 cases

Meeks v. State, 339 So. 2d 186 (Fla. 1976).

Tyrone T. Johnson v. State of Florida (Fla. 2024).

Michael H. Hunt v. State of Florida (Fla. 2025).

— 921.141(7)(b) — 12 cases

Kyzer v. State, 399 So. 2d 317 (Ala. Crim. App. 1979).

Raymond Bright v. State of Florida (Fla. 2020).

Michael Lawrence Woodbury v. State of Florida (Fla. 2021).

Leo L. Boatman v. State of Florida (Fla. 2024).

— 921.141(7)(d) — 2 cases

Meeks v. State, 339 So. 2d 186 (Fla. 1976).

— 921.141(7)(e) — 2 cases

Meeks v. State, 339 So. 2d 186 (Fla. 1976).

— 921.141(7)(f) — 11 cases

Kyzer v. State, 399 So. 2d 317 (Ala. Crim. App. 1979).

Raymond Bright v. State of Florida (Fla. 2020).

James Terry Colley, Jr. v. State of Florida (Fla. 2020).

Michael Lawrence Woodbury v. State of Florida (Fla. 2021).

— 921.141(7)(g) — 5 cases

Randy W. Tundidor v. State of Florida, 221 So. 3d 587 (Fla. 2017).

Meeks v. State, 339 So. 2d 186 (Fla. 1976).

Timothy W. Fletcher v. State of Florida (Fla. 2025).

— 921.141(7)(h) — 13 cases

Michael H. Hunt v. State of Florida (Fla. 2025).

Michael H. Hunt v. State of Florida (Fla. 2026).

Raymond Bright v. State of Florida (Fla. 2020).

Daniel Jacob Craven, Jr. v. State of Florida (Fla. 2020).

Thomas Bevel v. State of Florida (Fla. 2023).

— 921.141(8) — 13 cases

Granville Ritchie v. State of Florida (Fla. 2022).

Tyrone T. Johnson v. State of Florida (Fla. 2024).

Timothy W. Fletcher v. State of Florida (Fla. 2025).

— 921.141(B)(i) — 1 case

Tavares David Calloway v. State of Florida, 210 So. 3d 1160 (Fla. 2017).

— 921.141(b) — 1 case

Donald James Smith v. State of Florida (Fla. 2021).

— 921.141(b)(b) — 1 case

Griffin v. State, 474 So. 2d 777 (Fla. 1985).

— 921.141(d) — 1 case

State v. Matute-Chirinos, 732 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998).

— 921.141(h) — 1 case

State v. Matute-Chirinos, 732 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998).

— 921.141(l) — 1 case

Kenneth R. Jackson v. State of Florida, 213 So. 3d 754 (Fla. 2017).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.