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.
Stay informed about our latest work in the courts.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU's privacy statement.
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