No. 18-5021
IFP
Tags: constitutional-rights criminal-procedure death-penalty due-process eighth-amendment equal-protection fourteenth-amendment hurst-retroactivity hurst-v-florida retroactivity ring-v-arizona supremacy-clause supreme-court-review
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess Punishment Securities JusticiabilityDoctri
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess Punishment Securities JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2018-09-24
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does the Florida Supreme Court's partial retroactivity formula for Hurst v. Florida violations violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Does the Florida Supreme Court’s partial retroactivity formula, designed to limit the class of condemned prisoners obtaining a life-or-death jury determination pursuant to Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016), violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution? 2. Does the Florida Supreme Court’s partial retroactivity formula employed for Hurst violations in Florida violate the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution in light of Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718 (2016)? i
Docket Entries
2018-10-01
Petition DENIED.
2018-08-09
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/24/2018.
2018-07-24
Brief of respondent Florida in opposition filed.
2018-06-25
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 30, 2018)
2018-04-09
Application (17A1077) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until June 28, 2018.
2018-04-04
Application (17A1077) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from April 29, 2018 to June 28, 2018, submitted to Justice Thomas.
Attorneys
Paul Alfred Brown