PER CURIAM.
We have for review Louis B. Gaskins appeal of the circuit courts order denying Gaskins motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. This Court has jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.
Gaskins motion sought relief pursuant to the United States Supreme Courts decision in Hurst v. Florida , --- U.S. ----, 136 S.Ct. 616, 193 L.Ed.2d 504 (2016), and our decision on remand in Hurst v. State (Hurst ), 202 So.3d 40 (Fla. 2016), cert. denied , --- U.S. ----, 137 S.Ct. 2161, 198 L.Ed.2d 246 (2017). After this Court decided Hitchcock v. State , 226 So.3d 216 (Fla.), cert. denied , --- U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 513, 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017), Gaskin responded to this Courts order to show cause arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in this case.
After reviewing Gaskins response to the order to show cause, as well as the States arguments in reply, we conclude that Gaskin is not entitled to relief. Gaskin was sentenced to two sentences of death following a jurys recommendation for two death sentences for [two] murders [both] by a vote of eight to four. Gaskin v. State , 218 So.3d 399, 400 (Fla. 2017) (citing Gaskin v. State , 591 So.2d 917, 919 (Fla. 1991) ). Gaskins sentence of death became final in 1993. Id. at 401. Thus, as this Court has previously determined, Hurst does not apply retroactively to Gaskins sentence of death. See Hitchcock , 226 So.3d at 217 ; Gaskin , 218 So.3d at 401 (denying Gaskins claim to relief under Hurst v. Florida ). Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Gaskins motion.
The Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Gaskin, we caution that any rehearing motion containing reargument will be stricken. It is so ordered.
LABARGA, C.J., and QUINCE, POLSTON, and LAWSON, JJ., concur.
PARIENTE, J., concurs in result with an opinion.
LEWIS and CANADY, JJ., concur in result.
PARIENTE, J., concurring in result.
I concur in result because I recognize that this Courts opinion in Hitchcock v. State , 226 So.3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert. denied , --- U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 513, 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017), is now final. However, I continue to adhere to the views expressed in my dissenting opinion in Hitchcock .