Whether the Florida Supreme Court's partial retroactivity approach for Hurst relief violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments

QUESTION PRESENTED 1. Does the Florida Supreme Court's partial retroactivity approach providing for relief pursuant to Hurst v. Florida, 136 8. Ct. 616 (2016) and Hurst v. State, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016) to death sentenced prisoners whose sentences became final after Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002) but excluding relief for those who death sentences became final during the time period between Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) and Ring, violate the violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution? I