Hurst v. Florida
| 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 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.