Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Hurst v. Florida

No description
by

Incarnation Catholic

on 24 May 2017

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Hurst v. Florida

Supreme Court
Background to this case
Why This Was Brought to the Supreme Court
This was brought to the Supreme Court because the judge wanted Hurst to be sentenced to death and that was unconstitutional.

The judge did not follow the ten amendments and did not let Hurst have a speedy trial.

Also, the judge compared this case and anthor case that did not match.

The supreme court said it was unessacery that the judge wanted Hurst to a death sentence without knowing the case.

Decision
Florida's death sentencing scheme violated the Sixth Amendment

Although the Florida sentencing scheme required that the jury recommend a death sentence in order to impose the death penalty, the judge was only required to take the jury recommendation under consideration.

Hurst was sentenced 45 years to jail
It was a 7-5 vote that hutrst be sent to jail.
How this impacted American life
This impacted american life because judges can no longer sentence you to death without having a trial.


Constitutional Issue
The constitutional issue was that the judge violated the sixth amendment without knowing the person or case.


GOAL!
Hurst v. Florida
Date- January 12, 2016
Timothy Hurst was charged with first degree murder in 1998.
Before being sentenced to death . Hurst was granted a new sentencing trial because the Supreme Court of Florida found that his counsel should be investigated.
At his trial prosecuters linked him to the crime with forensic evidence and witnesses who testified that he announced in advance that he planned to rob the restaurant.
He had a second hearing in 2012 at the supreme court.
In October the court decided to leave it final and to sentence him for 45 years in jail.
Full transcript