PHILLIPS v. STATE (2018)

This case is before the Court on appeal from an order granting in part and denying in part a motion to vacate a judgment of conviction of first-degree murder and a sentence of death under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851.¹ We hereby dismiss this appeal because the guilt phase issues were waived since they were not briefed by Phillips, and the penalty phase issues were mooted by the new penalty phase ordered by the trial court pursuant to Hurst v. State, 202 So.3d 40 (Fla. 2016), cert. denied, ––– U.S. ––––, 137 S.Ct. 2161, 198 L.Ed.2d 246 (2017). Because there will be a new penalty phase, it is inconsequential whether Phillips's trial counsel was ineffective for failing to raise the issue of intellectual disability at the previous penalty phase. As the State argued, Phillips may raise the issue of intellectual disability at the trial court prior to his new penalty phase proceedings. See Godwin v. State, 593 So.2d 211, 212 (Fla. 1992) (“A case is ‘moot’ when it presents no actual controversy or when the issues have ceased to exist.” (citing Black's Law Dictionary 1008 (6th ed. 1990) ) ).

It is so ordered.

FOOTNOTES

1.   We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.

PER CURIAM.

CANADY, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, POLSTON, LABARGA, and LAWSON, JJ., concur.