1. Does the Florida Supreme Court's partial retroactivity approach providing
for relief pursuant to Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016) and Hurst v.
State, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016) to death sentenced prisoners whose
sentences became final after Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002) but
excluding relief for those who death sentences became final during the time
period between Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) and Ring,
violate the violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United
States Constitution?

Whether the Florida Supreme Court's partial retroactivity approach for Hurst relief violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments