SCOTUS Strikes Down Florida’s Death Penalty Sentencing Method

The justices on Tuesday ruled 8-1 that the state’s sentencing procedure is flawed because juries play only an advisory role in recommending death while the judge can reach a different decision.

Liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing on behalf of the court’s majority, said the right to an impartial jury guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution’s Sixth Amendment “required Florida to base Timothy Hurst’s death sentence on a jury’s verdict, not a judge’s fact-finding”.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court struck down Florida’s death sentencing scheme as unconstitutional because the state relied on “a judge’s factfinding” and not “a jury’s verdict” to sentence a person to death.

The case was brought by Timothy Lee Hurst, an inmate sent to death row after killing a co-worker at a fast-food restaurant. A jury recommended a death sentence by a 7-5 vote, but without any finding of facts that justified the sentence and no way to know whether even those seven recommending death agreed on a single aggravating factor or justification.

Under Florida law, the state requires juries in capital sentencing hearings to weigh factors for and against imposing a death sentence.

“Every defendant in Florida whose death sentence was imposed in this matter will be challenging the constitutionality of his or her death sentence under Hurst”, said Robert Dunham, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center.

De la Rionda says- in his interpretation of the Supreme Court ruling- the cases which have already gone through appeal will not be affected by this ruling. Florida Supreme Court affirmed the sentence rejecting the argument of the convict that this capital sentencing scheme is unconstitutional.

Houchin, who successfully prosecuted Altersberger, believes the Florida Legislature will have to change its death penalty law.

Action News Jax Law and Safety Expert Dale Carson said this new ruling claims all 12 jurors have to unanimously agree to the death sentence.

The case that went before the Supreme Court, Hurst v. Florida, was a 1998 murder case out of Pensacola.

Justice Samuel Alito filed the lone dissent, arguing Florida judges perform only “what amounts, in practical terms, to a reviewing function” which “duplicates the steps previously performed by the jury”. That decision overturned a previous allowance that had given a judge the power to override a jury’s recommendation and impose a death sentence unilaterally. In 2002, the Supreme Court found Arizona’s capital punishment practice to be unconstitutional for reasons similar to those in the Florida case. Florida has nearly 400 death row prisoners, behind California, which has the most but rarely carries out the sentences.

She said lower courts could consider the state’s contention that any flaws in its death sentencing system didn’t affect Hurst’s ultimate sentence. He also noted that no Florida trial court has overruled a jury’s recommendation of a life sentence for more than 15 years. The others are Alabama and Delaware.

News of the high court’s decision stunned Florida legislators.