Whether the Florida Supreme Court's interpretation of the Anti-Murder Act of 1815 violates constitutional protections against unlawful state action and due process rights

|.^ XslFt c£ torsos 'pictcwVVeA. W boWWvLV dc c\dA AKi,-S^dTEf c>F A/mci^^A-S hffr£ l_Pro5<.torVvD«\ , to^YY&UC tou&XS ImK of AJcJ'bjeeA' 'Afofu&bl<£ff Of >2*) Xs radA'S S^ytr\ (LtV SoJrteir CXcA Vcv*. HctW\o» Hoa W ikA, V>v| AXA dx&t-CcFvorv, \n ViolaFifcA of AtoguQ. IM3 , l3r\tt.Dt\sF\uFoaoA uiVasx. 4b«, <&rodh\os As j 0-cA &<x^y\£aC>US Dfibri(UtAiors VCJt\ 3.) tftK Stkyss H^ o&b i6 K.i.i.oLo'TW DuiA ^rnirTory cloA, £o n*s(ibhonoj[ t.OvrvS^\cJS\A.S J KWA\o rvaX\^ A)eY\Npftx<pV IhrncJks fcjUaJi fVckciioft o? '~fhl Xo±*o bo««*U 'XlW US.t. W#Ws6o St ^ H.) ~To '’PcoksXvkc, S€,. InmAs ^cem VlolaA t\ft ^ Fm1t\ ^J'T'. uyY ~Rvc*WtS SV\c>otA VaeJS \w of A S ptrxyir ^asxtJlon bt 'VoooA 'bsj (X 3o~sj Ponsootvf b Appftftciv AhA L*>S. i, AuxtA 3H 0J\A KT^~"TF.V4Y * 5.) iuWt A 3pincxr 3aAgboA -Se-Kwa b&s U&n OroWWkA b (bnixaJl an gler of AffOol £l*W\{" bung AumeA Oor V.S.A., Do^'Thu Vtohae %i U.S’k• Amwi XHt Anri-^ME&j Act #f 1815 * I*-) ^ ?rovtto ** /ktxxstA /Wumatf uios baertd t p^0MS{ fa InTew i, IS ihi u)mr offtfJhiiu /orp as "/fit t-uodanwfd 1/lsbuminf 75 Sci-fe.^ uard a^ejnsf A ioxoiess £-oW<' wvf AcT/o^ )n Vf»W»A of M*£, Am.v/vI l*f kV HfyS TVst \n1 (HT-S kWAc^A \*\TW ST/rt(5 OF fL&MDA.ere, /r is C^VBSTlOhis oF lAtLEfix IbblfC /mporf&-r> t,£ ; 7c> fnsuVt'Jhi hue. Adrcutusbcvh&n cX SusTit-F 'Tfiro OiJt Jhi iA'S.Ar* I t» IK