Supreme Court finds Florida’s capital punishment process unconstitutional

However, the judge issued the death penalty sentences in both cases.

“There’s no incentive for the defendant to plead, so we don’t have the death penalty to take off the table, so to speak”, said Eddins.

The case did not touch upon the bigger and more divisive question of the constitutionality of the death penalty.

To read the U.S. Supreme Court’s full opinion, visit its website.

Gov. Scott is still looking at the Supreme Court’s decision that could drastically change Florida’s death penalty system.

“Juries across the country have become increasingly reluctant to vote in favor of death”, she said.

The future of the death penalty in the United States is murky, and we know there are some justices who believe the Constitution’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment necessitates the policy’s end.

Florida has a two-tiered system, Fletcher said: the jury recommends the sentence, the judge imposes the sentence. In that decision, the Court struck down Arizona’s sentencing scheme because it allowed a judge, not a jury, to find the facts necessary to impose a death sentence on a defendant. Even if a case is ordered to go through sentencing again, the verdict- which is determined in the trial phase, not the penalty phase- will likely not be affected.

Without that finding of an aggravating circumstance, there could be no death sentence imposed. The sentence prescribed by Jury is only advisory.

Who makes the final determination for a death sentence is at the heart of Florida’s problematic capital sentencing scheme.

“Without contesting Ring’s holding, Florida offers a bevy of arguments for why Hurst’s sentence is constitutional”.

The order sent Hurst’s case to the Florida Supreme Court for further proceedings “not inconsistent with this opinion”, the ruling said. But it would certainly affect capital cases awaiting trial. He asked one of the friends to hide a container of money that he said was from the Popeye’s safe.

Studies show that more than 20 percent of inmates on Alabama’s death row were recommended by juries to serve life in prison without parole. Well over half of those, 101, were sentenced by such life-to-death judicial overrides. The Legislature has resisted efforts to fix the unique process, and now the state has no choice. He was granted a new sentencing hearing in 2012. But the jury decided that by a 7-5 vote; it was not clear if a majority of jurors voted for either circumstance separately.

The Florida system was actually upheld by the Supreme Court in the 1980s, a fact the justices acknowledged on Tuesday. “None holds water”, said Sotomayor.

“The Sixth Amendment protects a defendant’s right to an impartial jury”. “Rather, Florida requires a judge to find these facts”.

Florida is one of only three states that does not require a unanimous jury verdict when sentencing someone to death.

The court’s ruling was predicated on its precedent in the 2002 case of Ring v. Arizona. Justice Samuel Alito authored the only dissent, stressing that “more than 17 years have passed since Cynthia Harrison was brutally murdered” and the importance of “bringing this protracted litigation to a close”.

The evidence against Hurst is “overwhelming”, Alito said.

Critics said it should no surprise that the Supreme Court ruled against the state. “Nobody should be surprised by this decision by the nation’s highest court”.

Capital punishment in Florida is, for now, on hold. And that could have a major impact for convicts on death row, right now. Mr Hurst’s lawyers argued that the shooter’s low IQ and “borderline intellectual functioning” was a reason not to receive the death penalty.