No. 19-8341
Richard Knight v. Florida Department of Corrections
IFP
Tags: capital-punishment criminal-procedure florida-sentencing hurst-v-florida retroactivity ring-precedent ring-v-arizona teague-standard teague-v-lane
Key Terms:
DueProcess Punishment HabeasCorpus Securities
DueProcess Punishment HabeasCorpus Securities
Latest Conference:
2020-09-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether Hurst v. Florida is retroactive to the petitioner under Teague v. Lane
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED 1. Pursuant to the test of Teague v. Lane, is Hurst v. Florida retroactive to Petitioner, whose Florida capital sentence became final after the issuance of Ring v. Arizona? i
Docket Entries
2020-10-05
Petition DENIED.
2020-07-09
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-06-25
Brief of respondent Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections in opposition filed.
2020-05-21
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including June 25, 2020.
2020-05-20
Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 26, 2020 to June 25, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
2020-02-13
Application (19A892) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until April 18, 2020.
2020-02-07
Application (19A892) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from February 18, 2020 to April 18, 2020, submitted to Justice Thomas.
2019-04-20
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 26, 2020)
Attorneys
Richard Knight
Todd Gerald Scher — Capital Collateral Regional Counsel-South, Petitioner
Todd Gerald Scher — Capital Collateral Regional Counsel-South, Petitioner
Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections
Amitabh Agarwal — Office of the Attorney General, Respondent
Amitabh Agarwal — Office of the Attorney General, Respondent