October Term 2015 · Docket 14-7505

Must a jury decide facts that make a defendant eligible for the death penalty?

Florida law lets a judge decide if a defendant faces execution. Timothy Hurst argues this violates the Sixth Amendment.

Official caption
Hurst v. Florida
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Seth Waxman argued that a judge made the factual finding for Hurst's death eligibility. He stated this violates the Sixth Amendment under prior Supreme Court precedent.

    Florida's advocate argued the system remains constitutional. He claimed the jury already decided the necessary facts for Hurst's case.

    justice_questions

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

Timothy Hurst faces the death penalty in Florida. A judge, not a jury, found the facts that made him eligible for execution. Hurst claims this violates the Sixth Amendment. Florida argues the system remains constitutional. The Court must decide who decides these critical facts.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 13, 2015.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Timothy Hurst wants the Court to strike down Florida's sentencing law. He seeks a new trial with a jury deciding his eligibility for death.

Florida wants the Court to uphold its current sentencing system. It seeks to keep the judge's decision on death eligibility.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Florida argues its system was constitutional before recent rulings. It claims the jury already decided the necessary facts for Hurst's case.

Hurst argues a judge made the factual finding for his death eligibility. He claims this violates the Sixth Amendment under prior Supreme Court precedent.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Scalia asked if a judge can ever reverse a jury's death recommendation.

Justice Scalia questioned whether juries must agree on specific aggravating factors or just generic conclusions.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines who decides if a person faces execution. It shapes the balance of power between judges and juries in capital cases. The outcome affects the rights of all defendants in death penalty states.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON