No. 23-7391
Relisted (2)IFP
Tags: capital-punishment death-penalty eighth-amendment fourteenth-amendment individual-responsibility jury-instructions sentencing-phase
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess Punishment JusticiabilityDoctri
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess Punishment JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2024-09-30
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Where the court in a capital case allows the State to argue that the jury should, or must, try its best to reach a unanimous penalty phase verdict, is the jurors' sense of individual responsibility for the death-penalty decision impermissibly undermined in contravention of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Where the court in a capital case allows the State to argue that the jury should, or must, try its best to reach a unanimous penalty phase verdict, is the jurors’ sense of individual responsibility for the death-penalty decision impermissibly undermined in contravention of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution? i
Docket Entries
2024-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2024-08-22
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
2024-08-20
Record received from the Supreme Court of Florida (1 CD - Record on Appeal; 11 CDs - Exhibit; 1 CD - Sealed Record on Appeal).
2024-08-06
Record Requested.
2024-07-03
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
2024-06-19
Brief of Florida in opposition submitted.
2024-06-19
Brief of respondent Florida in opposition filed.
2024-05-28
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including June 24, 2024.
2024-05-23
Motion to extend the time to file a response from June 5, 2024 to June 24, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
2024-04-30
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 5, 2024)
Attorneys
Florida
Markeith Loyd
Nancy Ryan — Office of the Public Defender, Petitioner