Hildwin v. Florida
| Hildwin v. Florida | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Decided May 30, 1989 | |
| Full case name | Paul C. Hildwin, petitioner v. Florida |
| Docket no. | 88-6066 |
| Citations | 490 U.S. 638 (more) 109 S.Ct. 2055, 104 L.Ed.2d 728 |
| Holding | |
| The Sixth Amendment does not require that the specific findings authorizing the imposition of the death sentence be made by a jury. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Per curiam | |
| Dissent | Brennan |
| Dissent | Marshall |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. VI Spaziano v. Florida (1984) McMillan v. Pennsylvania (1986) | |
Overruled by | |
| Hurst v. Florida (2016) | |
Hildwin v. Florida, 490 U. S. 638 (1972), is a United States Supreme Court case which addresses the sixth amendment to the United States Constitution. It considers if imposition of the death penalty when no specific finding of aggravating factors was made by the jury. In a per curiam decision, the court ruled that there is no need for the jury to present specific findings when imposing the death penalty, as the judge is the one who decides the fact while the jury merely gives recommendations to the judge.[1]
Background
[edit]The petitioner, Paul Hildwin, was convicted of first-degree murder, a capital offense, by the jury. During the sentencing, with only one factor needed to sentence him to death, the judge found four aggravating factors and sentenced him to death. However, the jury did not provide any aggravating factor in their advisory of verdict.[2]
The petitioner then appealed for the court to decide if the Florida capital sentencing scheme is in violation of the 6th amendment to the United States Constitution.
Opinion of the Court
[edit]In a per curiam decision, the court upheld the Supreme Court of Florida's decision and held that there is no right under the sixth amendment to the United States Constitution that required there to be specific findings made by the jury to impose a death penalty.[3]
Dissents
[edit]Both Justice Brennan and Marshall dissented and reiterated their view that the death penalty is cruel and unusual and pointed to their respective dissents in Gregg v. Georgia.[3]
Subsequent events
[edit]This case was overturned in 2016 in the Supreme Court ruling Hurst v. Florida.[4][5][6]
The defendant, Paul Hildwin, was released from prison in 2020 after DNA testing exonerated him of the crime. Prior to his release, he spent 35 years in prison.[7][8][9]
References
[edit]- ^ "Hildwin v. Florida". Oyez. Retrieved July 30, 2022.
- ^ "Paul C. HILDWIN v. FLORIDA". LII / Legal Information Institute. Retrieved June 6, 2022.
- ^ a b "Hildwin v. Florida, 490 U.S. 638 (1989)". Justia Law. Retrieved June 6, 2022.
- ^ "Hurst v. Florida" (PDF). Supreme Court of the United States. January 12, 2016.
- ^ "Hurst v. Florida". SCOTUSblog. Retrieved July 30, 2022.
- ^ Liptak, Adam (January 12, 2016). "Supreme Court Strikes Down Part of Florida Death Penalty". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved July 30, 2022.
- ^ "Paul Hildwin Set Free After 35-Year Struggle for Justice". Innocence Project. March 9, 2020. Retrieved June 6, 2022.
- ^ "Paul Hildwin Released from Florida Prison 34 Years After Being Sentenced to Death". Death Penalty Information Center. Retrieved June 6, 2022.
- ^ "He spent 28 years on death row for a Florida murder. Now, he's free". Tampa Bay Times. Retrieved July 30, 2022.
External links
[edit]- Text of Hildwin v. Florida, 490 U.S. 638 (1989) is available from: Justia Oyez (oral argument audio)