The Florida Supreme Court has struck down a new state law which would have allowed the state to move forward with the death penalty if 10 to 12 jurors recommended it to the judge, now ruling the decision must instead be unanimous.
“Florida’s state constitutional right to trial by jury, and our Florida jurisprudence, the penalty phase jury must be unanimous in making the critical findings and recommendation that are necessary before a sentence of death may be considered by the judge or imposed,” the ruling stated.
Two rulings amounted to the decision Friday.
“If ‘death is different,’ as this Court and the United States Supreme Court have repeatedly pronounced, then requiring unanimity in the jury’s final recommendation of life or death is an essential prerequisite to the continued constitutionality of the death penalty in this state,” wrote Justice Barbara Pariente in a concurring opinion in one ruling.
Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the state’s previous guideline of requiring a 7-5 majority jury recommendation for a judge to consider the death penalty was unconstitutional.
As a result of that decision, the Florida Legislature then quickly worked to change the guideline, The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in January the state’s previous guideline requiring a 7-5 majority jury recommendation for a judge to consider a death penalty sentence was unconstitutional.
The ruling prompted state lawmakers to rush to change the guideline, altering the majority requirement to be 10-2.
“This requirement will dispel most, if not all, doubts about the future validity and long-term viability of the death penalty in Florida,” the Florida Supreme Court wrote Friday.
Florida has the second-highest Death Row population in the country, behind California.
In a separate case, the Florida Supreme Court ordered a new sentencing for Timothy Hurst, a man who was convicted of killing his Popeye’s co-worker in Pensacola in 1998. The jury convicted Hurst of the crime unanimously, but recommended the death penalty by a vote of 11-1.
“The Sixth Amendment protects a defendant’s right to an impartial jury. This right required Florida to base Timothy Hurst’s death sentence on a jury’s verdict, not a judge’s factfinding. Florida’s sentencing scheme, which required the judge alone to find the existence of an aggravating circumstance, is therefore unconstitutional,” wrote Florida’s highest court on Hurst’s case.
With the new ruling in tow, Hurst will now face execution only if the jury recommends the death penalty unanimously based on “aggravating factors” proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
The decision could mean a totally new sentence for Hurst and new sentences for the 385 people on Death Row in Florida, some of whom did not receive a unanimous
Justices Ricky Polston and Charles Canady, who is on Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s shortlist to be elected to the U.S. Supreme Court, dissented with the majority.
Reach reporter Allison Nielsen by email at allison@sunshinestatenews.com or follow her on Twitter: @AllisonNielsen.
