Question not identified.

No question identified. : Monday, September 18, 2023. The jurisdiction of this Court will be invoked under 28 U.S.C. §1257(a). Copies of the Florida Supreme Court’s opinion and of the order denying rehearing are attached. Applicant requests this extension of time to file the petition for a writ of certiorari because Petitioner’s lead counsel — Chelsea Shirley — is out on a leave of absence pursuant to the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”). Petitioner’s counsel is set to return to The Office of the Capital Collateral Regional Counsel-North on October 2, 2023. Counsel for respondent has informed us that the State has no objection to a 80day extension but does not agree to a 60-day extension. For the foregoing reasons, the application for a 60-day extension of time, to and including November 17, 2023, within which to file a petition for a writ of certiorari in this case should be granted. Respectfully submitted, ROBERT S. FRIEDMAN Counsel of Record on behalf of CHELSEA SHIRLEY Office of the Capital Collateral Regional Counsel—North 1004 DeSoto Park Drive Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (850) 487-0922 AUGUST 22, 2023 Supreme Court of Florida TUESDAY, JUNE 20, 2023 Hector Sanchez-Torres, SC2022-0322 Appellant(s) Lower Tribunal No(s).: v. 102009CF00067 1000AMX State of Florida, Appellee(s) Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing and Clarification is hereby denied. MUNIZ, C.J., and CANADY, LABARGA, COURIEL, GROSSHANS, and FRANCIS, Ju., concur. SASSO, J., did not participate. A True Copy Test: A. Tomasino Clerk, Supreme Court $C2022-0322 6/20/2023 CASE NO.: SC2022-0322 Page Two KC Served: HON. TARA S. GREEN PAMELA J. HAZEL NIDA IMTIAZ HON. DON H. LESTER HON. MARK H. MAHON CHARMAINE M. MILLSAPS CHELSEA SHIRLEY Supreme Court of Florida No. SC22-322 HECTOR SANCHEZ-TORRES, Appellant, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. March 16, 2023 PER CURIAM. Hector Sanchez-Torres appeals the circuit court’s order summarily denying his successive postconviction motion filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. For the reasons explained below, we affirm. 1. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. BACKGROUND In 2008, Sanchez-Torres and his coperpetrator, Markeil Thomas, robbed and killed Erick Colon as he was walking home.? The pair left Colon’s body on the sidewalk, where it was discovered a few hours later with a single shot through the head. Colon’s cell phone and wallet were gone. Weeks later, Sanchez-Torres’s younger sister found an unfamiliar cell phone and called the contact listed as “mom.” A distraught woman answered and explained that the phone had belonged to her murdered son. The sister hung up and described the exchange to her mother, who then contacted the police. Eventually, Sanchez-Torres confessed to the murder but offered inconsistent statements as to who fired the fatal shot. Sanchez-Torres was convicted of armed robbery and firstdegree murder, and was sentenced to death for the murder. Importantly, in imposing sentence, the court did not rely ona triggerman finding. In its sentencing order, the court clarified that 2. The facts of the crime are detailed in our decision affirming Sanchez-Torres’s convictions and death sentence on direct appeal. See Sanchez-Torres v. State, 130 So. 3d 661 (Fla. 2013). -2Q it “[wa]s not making a finding that Defendant, in fact, was the person who shot Eric[k] Joel Colon” and that it had not “relied upon the inference that Defendant may have been the triggerman as an aggravating factor justifying the death penalty.” Sent’g Ord. at 13. Instead, it gave great weight to two aggravators—“none of which [we]re based on Defendant’s triggerman status,” id—to justify the sentence: that the murder had occurred during a robbery, and that Sanchez-Torres had confessed to and been convicted of another murder. On direct appeal, we affirmed the convictions and death sentence. Sanchez-Torres v. State, 130 So. 3d 661, 676 (Fla. 2013). We later affirmed denial of Sanchez-Torres’s initial postconviction