Hurst v. Florida
What's at Stake
Whether Florida’s death penalty scheme violates the Constitution by allowing the judge, rather than a jury, to make critical factfinding determinations.
Summary
Under Florida law, the existence of aggravating and mitigating factors is determined by the judge during the sentencing phase of a capital case. The jury plays an advisory role only, and even then its recommendation can be based on a simple majority vote. Supporting the defendant’s contention that this system is unconstitutional, the ACLU’s amicus brief focuses on the constitutional requirement of a unanimous jury whose factual findings are dispositive when the state seeks to impose the death penalty.
Legal Documents
-
06/17/2015
Hurst v. Florida - Amicus Brief
Hurst v. FloridaLegal Documents
Hurst v. Florida - Amicus Brief
Date Filed: 06/17/2015
Download Document
Support our on-going litigation and work in the courts
Donate now