Does the Florida Supreme Court's partial retroactivity decision violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Does the Florida Supreme Court’s partial retroactivity decision, which limits the class of deathsentenced individuals entitled to a jury determination of their sentence pursuant to Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016), violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution? 2. Does the partial retroactivity formula employed for Hurst errors in Florida violate the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution in light of Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718 (2016)? 3. Does the Florida Supreme Court’s holding that a Hurst error is per se harmless where a jury issues a generalized unanimous recommendation for death — after receiving instructions that the judge would make both the findings of facts necessary for a death sentence and render the final decision on the death penalty — contravene the Eighth Amendment under Caldwell v. Mississippi, 472 U.S. 320 (1985)? ii