No. 18-8409

Anthony Mungin v. Florida

Lower Court: Florida
Docketed: 2019-03-14
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: capital-punishment death-penalty disparate-treatment due-process eighth-amendment equal-protection fourteenth-amendment retroactivity
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess Punishment HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2019-05-09
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Florida Supreme Court's application of only partial retroactivity of Hurst v. State and Hurst v. Florida violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED 1. Whether the Florida Supreme Court’s application of only partial retroactivity of Hurst v. State and Hurst v. Florida violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments because it arbitrarily uses as the cutoff point for retroactivity an earlier decision invalidating Arizona’s capital sentencing scheme under the Sixth Amendment, and results in the disparate treatment of similarly situated individuals. : ;

Docket Entries

2019-05-13
Petition DENIED.
2019-04-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/9/2019.
2019-04-04
Brief of respondent State of Florida in opposition filed.
2019-03-11
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 15, 2019)

Attorneys

Anthony Mungin
Todd Gerald ScherLaw Office of Todd G. Scher, P.L., Petitioner
Todd Gerald ScherLaw Office of Todd G. Scher, P.L., Petitioner
State of Florida
Carolyn M. SnurkowskiOffice of the Attorney General, Respondent
Carolyn M. SnurkowskiOffice of the Attorney General, Respondent