The U.S. Supreme Court struck a blow for justice and decency Tuesday with its lopsided ruling declaring that Florida’s death sentencing system is unconstitutional and gives too much authority to judges.
Advertisement
Under Florida’s system, juries render an “advisory sentence” by a majority vote after an evidentiary hearing, without specifying the factual basis for their recommendation.
“The Sixth Amendment requires a jury, not a judge, to find each fact necessary to impose a sentence of death”, Sotomayor said.
Justice Alito added that even if there was a constitutional violation in the procedure used to sentence Hurst to death, that error did not influence the outcome of the case. His measure would require unanimous juries in all death penalty decisions, not just when deciding aggravating circumstances. The trial judge, on her own, made the formal findings concerning aggravating circumstances that are necessary to justify the death penalty. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who authored the majority opinion, wrote, “The Sixth Amendment protects a defendant’s right to an impartial jury”.
Last year, Florida was one of the most enthusiastic states in the nation for handing out the death penalty – and it sentenced those prisoners to death with an unusual system. Tuesday’s decision has no bearing on Florida’s method of capital punishment or the Eighth Amendment: death row inmates may still choose between lethal injection and the electric chair.
Dissenting alone, Justice Samuel A. Alito said the justices had upheld Florida’s system in the past.
“In a death penalty case, you would think it would be obvious that a jury make a unanimous decision one way or the other, regarding a person’s life or death”, Hornsby said. Rep. Matt Gaetz, an attorney who has dealt with capital punishment during his legislative career, predicted that Florida legislators would act swiftly to get the death penalty “right back on track”.
Either way, the Supreme Court Justices ruled that it is a jury who should ultimately decide the sentence.
Other states are likely to be affected as well.
Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda said the U.S. Supreme Court is making jurors independently decide if the death penalty should be imposed.
In Hurst’s case, prosecutors asked the jury to consider two aggravating factors: the murder was committed during a robbery, and it was “especially heinous, atrocious or cruel”.
Additionally, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision calls into question Alabama’s similar death sentencing scheme.
The court’s 8-1 decision means death row inmate Timothy Hurst, 37, could be re-sentenced for the 1998 murder of Cynthia Harrison in Pensacola, potentially avoiding capital punishment.
Joshua Lee Altersberger, 26, was sentenced to death in 2009 for the 2007 murder of Florida Highway Patrol Sgt. Nick Sottile along USA 27 near Lake Placid.
Tuesday’s ruling did not mention jury unanimity, but it is obvious the justices, at the very least, want Florida juries to be in agreement about the factors they believe necessitate the death penalty.
Advertisement
Timothy Lee Hurst might escape death as the Supreme Court deemed his verdict “unconstitutional”.
