Caldwell v. Mississippi, 472 U.S. 320, 105 S.Ct. 2633, 86 L.Ed.2d 231 (1985). The United States Supreme Court held in Caldwell that it is “constitutionally impermissible to rest a death sentence on a determination made by a sentencer who has been led to believe that the responsibility for determining the appropriateness of the defendant’s death rests elsewhere.” Id. at 328-29, 105 S.Ct. 2633. Troy is not entitled to relief on this claim for two reasons. First, Troy is procedurally barred from raising this claim. Although the trial record reflects that Troy filed a pretrial objection to the use of the standard jury instruction, Troy failed to raise this claim on direct appeal. Consequently, his Caldwell claim is procedurally barred. See Hitchcock v. State, 991 So.2d 337, 361 (Fla.2008) (<HOLDING>) (citing Jones v. State, 928 So.2d 1178, 1183
holding that a similar claim in a rule 32 petition was procedurally barred because it was raised at trial and because it was raised on direct appeal holding that the defendants habeas claim was procedurally barred because it could have been or was raised in his postconviction motion holding that the caldwell claim is procedurally barred because it could have been raised on direct appeal but was not holding that the claim of not being able to interview jurors was procedurally barred because the claim should and could have been raised on direct appeal holding claim of deprivation of right to competent mental health evaluation was procedurally barred because it could have been raised on direct appeal