Bom. HC: Making Daughter-in-Law Sleep on Carpet, Not Allowing Her to Watch TV isn’t Cruelty  ||  Del. HC: Heavy Reliance on Sale Deed to Establish Agricultural Character of Land Would Be Misplaced  ||  All. HC: Suit Filed u/s 144 of UP-Revenue Code, 2006 Must Include Findings of Proceedings u/s 38(1)  ||  SC: Public Sector Undertakings Can’t Appoint Arbitrators Unilaterally  ||  SC Recalls Judgement Holding 2018 Amendment to SRA to be Applicable Prospectively  ||  SC: Union to Frame Rules Regarding Access of Public Places & Services to PwD  ||  SC: Doctrine of Lis Pendens Arises from the Time the Petition is Filed  ||  Supreme Court Issues Guidelines Regarding Recruitment of PwBD in District Judiciary  ||  Supreme Court Issues Guidelines Regarding Recruitment of PwBD in District Judiciary  ||  SC: Minority Status of AMU Not Lost Merely Because of its Incorporation by Statute    

Hurst v. Florida - (12 Jan 2016)

Florida’s sentencing scheme given the chop

MANU/USSC/0002/2016

Criminal

The United States Supreme Court overwhelmingly held Florida’s sentencing scheme unconstitutional under the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution. In the instant case, after Mr. Hurst was found guilty of murder in the first-degree, an additional sentencing proceeding was conducted in order to enhance the maximum sentence that could be imposed under State law. Such “hybrid” proceeding entailed the jury delivering an advisory verdict as to sentence, with judge conducting evidentiary hearing before the jury; having weighed the aggravating and mitigating circumstance would the judge enter sentence. Whereas the Sixth Amendment guarantees a defendant’s right to an impartial jury trial, the Court found that under Florida’s sentencing procedure judge alone had discretion to determine the existence of an aggravating circumstance affecting sentence. Justice Alito, however, dissented. He opined that error in sentencing in the instant case was harmless beyond reasonable doubt. Though the judge could alter the sentence recommended by the jury, his role practically amounted to a reviewing function.

Relevant : Ring vs. Arizona MANU/USSC/0068/2002

Tags : USA   FLORIDA   SENTENCING   SIXTH AMENDMENT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved