"[E]ven accepting for the sake of argument that the circuit court erred in denying the motion [to amend], any such error would clearly be harmless." Zakrzewski v. State , No. SC11-1896, 115 So.3d 1004 (Fla. Nov. 9, 2012) (table). Jimenez's claims are based upon written materials contained in NMPD's post-warrant records submission that "this Court is just as capable as the trial court of assessing."
Since that time, Zakrzewski has filed previous unsuccessful, successive postconviction motions. See, e.g., Zakrzewski v. State, 13 So.3d 1057 (Fla. Feb. 17, 2009) (Case No. SC08–59) (affirming denial of relief in first successive postconviction motion) (unpublished opinion); Zakrzewski v. State, 115 So.3d 1004 (Fla. Nov. 9, 2012) (Case No. SC11–1896) (affirming denial of relief in second successive postconviction motion) (unpublished opinion).On appeal, Zakrzewski raises two claims: (1) he is entitled to postconviction relief because a recently submitted affidavit shows that penalty-phase witnesses provided inaccurate testimony concerning the beliefs of philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche; and (2) because the Florida Legislature recently adopted the standard announced in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579, 587 (1993), this standard should be retroactively applied to the admissibility of the testimony concerning Nietzsche during his 1996 penalty-phase proceeding.
We reiterated that Porter “addressed a misapplication” of the Strickland standard and held that failure to apply it retroactively was neither violative of due process nor unconstitutionally arbitrary. 38 Fla. L. Weekly at S149;see Zakrzewski v. State, No. SC11–1896, 2012 WL 5835154 (Fla. Nov. 9, 2012) (“This Court did not state that the Strickland standard had changed such that it would be a violation of due process and unconstitutionally arbitrary not to apply it in Zakrzewski's case.”). Moreover, because Porter is not retroactive, we also affirm denial of Byrd's claim that Porter requires reconsideration of his previously denied claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and Brady violations.