Does the partial retroactivity formula for Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016) claims designed by the Florida Supreme Court, as applied to a prisoner whose death sentence was final between Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), and Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002), violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments on arbitrariness and equal protection grounds?

QUESTION PRESENTED 1. Does the partial retroactivity formula for Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016), claims designed by the Florida Supreme Court, as applied to a prisoner whose death sentence was final between Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), and Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002), violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments on arbitrariness and equal protection grounds? i