Hurst v. Florida | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Argued October 13, 2015 Decided January 12, 2016 | |
Full case name | Timothy Lee Hurst, Petitioner v. Florida |
Docket no. | 14-7505 |
Citations | 577 U.S. 92 (more) 136 S. Ct. 616; 193 L. Ed. 2d 504 |
Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
Case history | |
Prior | Hurst v. State, 147 So. 3d 435 (Fla. 2014); cert. granted, 135 S. Ct. 1531 (2015). |
Holding | |
Florida's capital sentencing scheme violates the Sixth Amendment in light of Ring v. Arizona. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Sotomayor, joined by Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Kagan |
Concurrence | Breyer (in judgment) |
Dissent | Alito |
Laws applied | |
U.S. Const. amend. VI | |
This case overturned a previous ruling or rulings | |
Spaziano v. Florida (1984), Hildwin v. Florida (1989) |
Hurst v. Florida, 577 U.S. 92 (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court, in an 8–1 ruling, applied the rule of Ring v. Arizona[1] to the Florida capital sentencing scheme, holding that the Sixth Amendment requires a jury to find the aggravating factors necessary for imposing the death penalty. In Florida, under a 2013 statute, the jury made recommendations but the judge decided the facts.
© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search