In a lethal-injection dissent last term, Justice Stephen Breyer’s call for reconsideration of the death penalty’s constitutionality captured headlines and re-fired the debate, but he sowed the seeds of that June dissent more than a decade ago in a case at the heart of Tuesday’s arguments in a challenge to Florida’s capital-punishment system.
In the Florida case—Hurst v. Florida—Timothy Hurst’s counsel, former Solicitor General Seth Waxman of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr, told the justices that Florida’s death-sentencing scheme violates the Constitution in light of their 2002 decision in Ring v. Arizona.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
