U.S. Supreme Court Rules Florida Death Penalty Unconstitutional

Recently, In Hurst v. Florida, the United States Supreme Court ruled Florida's death penalty unconstitutional as it requires judges, not juries, to find the existence of aggravating circumstances, and to decide the appropriate sentence.  Florida's scheme relegated the jury to an advisory role, which the court had to give "great weight", but from which the judge received no guidance as to the jury's findings with the exception of its generalized recommendation.  Writing for the eight justice majority, Justice Sotomayer reiterated the holding in Apprendi v. New Jersey that any fact which exposes the Defendant to a greater punishment than that authorized by the jury's guilty verdict is an essential element which must be submitted to the jury.  Applying the Apprendi decision in Ring v. Arizona, the Court had previously held that capital punishment required factfinding by the jury and not a judge if the death penalty was to be constitutionally imposed. Since Florida's death penalty statute explicitly required the judge to make additional findings in order to impose death, and since the greatest punishment under Florida law without those findings was life imprisonment, the Court determined that Apprendi and Ring were squarely on point as applied to Florida.   In Hurst, decided January 12, 2016, the Court therefore rejected the State's arguments that the jury's guilty verdict in the first phase of the trial necessarily included the requisite factfinding, and also rejected its argument that defense counsel's conceding or not opposing the underlying felony in a contested trial has the same effect as a guilty plea from which factfinding is rendered unnecessary. The Court expressly overruled the pre-Ring cases of Hildwin v. Florida and Spaziano v. Florida to the extent that they "allow a sentencing judge to find an aggravating circumstance, independent of a jury's factfinding."  The decision still leaves open the question of whether the judge, with the jury's factfinding, can impose sentence, and whether the jury verdict imposing death has to be unanimous.  Those questions were left for another day.

U.S. Supreme Court To Rule On Florida's Capital Murder Scheme, by David A. Brener

The United States Supreme Court granted review in May of a Florida death penalty case which will decide the constitutionality of Florida's capital sentencing scheme.  In Hurst v. Florida, the Supreme Court will decide whether Florida impermissibly permits juries to render an advisory death sentence by a mere majority vote, in contravention of the Sixth Amendment, and whether that lack of unanimity combined with judge sentencing and the lack of specific findings as to aggravating circumstances violates the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment.  Relying on the 2002 Supreme Court case of Ring v. Arizona, the Petitioner, along with amicus curiae briefs submitted by former Florida Supreme Court and trial judges, as well as the American Bar Association, argued that juries, not judges,  should make the factual findings and ultimate determination as to the sentence to be imposed.  They also made a compelling argument that jury unanimity should be required, as both reliability and community  moral standards are enhanced by unanimity of the jury when deciding the question of whether someone should live or die.  This case will be an extremely significant case for everyone connected with death penalty jurisprudence.  The case is scheduled for oral argument on October 3, 2015.

FIRST EXONERATED DEATH ROW INMATE DIES, by David A. Brener

David Keaton, Florida's and the nation's first exonerated death row inmate, died last month after several years of poor health and a history of heart problems.  Keaton was one of the infamous "Quincy Five", who along with four others was innocent of the murder of an off duty sheriff's deputy which took place during a 1970 convenience store robbery in the Florida town of Quincy.  Coerced confessions, unreliable eyewitness testimony, and a lack of physical evidence contributed to Keaton's wrongful conviction and his placement on Florida's death row.  This was true despite the fact that the fingerprint evidence did not match, nor did the description of the getaway vehicle.  The work of a private investigator tied ballistic and fingerprint evidence to several other men, none of whom was initially charged.  Keaton was fortunate- he was not only exonerated- but was determined to be innocent within two years of being sentenced to death.  Most are not so lucky.  Since Florida reinstated the death penalty, there have been 25 exonerations, most of whom spent decades on death row for a crime they did not commit.  Outrageous.