McKinnon v. Florida
In brief
The Supreme Court refused to hear McKinnon's case and did not decide whether Hurst applies to his case.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided · May 4, 2020
- What it’s about
- The Supreme Court denied review of McKinnon’s case, leaving in place the Florida Supreme Court’s ruling that the Hurst decisions do not apply retroactively to death-row prisoners whose convictions and sentences became final before Ring v. Arizona.
- Who it affects
- McKinnon's Supreme Court review ended without deciding whether the Hurst decisions could affect his sentence.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
Florida therefore prevailed, and McKinnon’s death sentence was not reopened on that basis.
The Florida Supreme Court had ruled that the Hurst decisions did not apply to death-row prisoners whose convictions and sentences became final before Ring v. Arizona.
Question presented
Whether the Florida Supreme Court’s decision that Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016), and Hurst v. State, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016), do not apply retroactively to Florida death row inmates whose convictions and sentences were final before Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002), violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution?
What the Court decided
Holding
Petition DENIED.
What's next
This Supreme Court docket action is finished. The denial did not decide the retroactivity question.
Documents
Opinions
Key filings
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
Show 7 moreShow fewer
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
More questions
- What did the Florida Supreme Court decide?
- It ruled that Hurst v. Florida and Hurst v. State did not apply retroactively to death-row prisoners whose convictions and sentences became final before Ring v. Arizona.
- Did the Supreme Court rule for Florida?
- No. It denied review without deciding the merits, so its order did not endorse either side.
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.