Hillstrom v. State
The Fourth District affirmed denial of a rule 3.850 motion as time-barred, holding that Counterman v. Colorado (requiring proof of mens rea for true-threat convictions under the First Amendment) has not been held to apply retroactively under Witt v. State and State v. Barnum. The court certified to the Florida Supreme Court the question of whether Counterman applies retroactively, and Judge Artau wrote separately urging the supreme court to revisit the Witt/Barnum retroactivity framework itself.
Key facts
- Hillstrom was convicted of making true threats and sought postconviction relief under rule 3.850 based on Counterman v. Colorado, which requires proof of mens rea for true-threat convictions under the First Amendment.
- The trial court denied Hillstrom's rule 3.850 motion as time-barred, and Hillstrom appealed to the Fourth District Court of Appeal.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This decision is significant because it certifies to the Florida Supreme Court an open and recurring question—whether Counterman's true-threat mens rea holding applies retroactively for postconviction relief—that will… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.