Has the Florida Supreme Court by abandoning comparative proportionality review in death penalty appeals while dismantling other safeguards, and in view of the proliferation of additional statutory aggravating factors (to the point where nearly all first-degree murder defendants are death-eligble) misapplied this Court's decision in Pulley v. Harris, 465 U.S. 37 (1984) and rendered Florida's capital sentencing scheme arbitrary, capricious, unreliable, and violative of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments?

QUESTION PRESENTED Has the Florida Supreme Court by abandoning comparative proportionality review in death penalty appeals while dismantling other safeguards, and in view of the proliferation of additional statutory aggravating factors (to the point where nearly all first-degree murder defendants are death-eligble) misapplied this Court’s decision in Pulley v. Harris, 465 U.S. 37 (1984) and rendered Florida’s capital sentencing scheme arbitrary, capricious, unreliable, and violative of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments? i STATEMENT OF