Is Florida's Prison Releasee Reoffender Act, which nullifies a Criminal Punishment Code (CPC) sentence, unconstitutional and a violation of the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution in light of the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Hurst v. Florida, 136 S. Ct. 616, 193 L. Ed. 2d 504 (2016) and the holdings in Alleyne v. United States, 133 S.Ct. 2151; 186 L.Ed. 2d 314 and Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed. 2d 435 (2000), when the jury's verdict only authorized a CPC sentence and the critical findings necessary to enhance the sentence were determined by the judge and not the jury.

Is the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Almendarez-Torres, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed. 2d 350 (1998) and its narrow exception of a "prior conviction" created in Apprendiand Alleyne continue to be valid, especially as applied to Florida's Prison Releasee Reoffender Act when a defendants previous date of release from prison, a critical finding necessary to impose an enhanced sentence, is considered a "prior conviction" under Almendarez- Torres and Florida law.

Whether Florida's Prison Releasee Reoffender Act is unconstitutional and a violation of the Sixth Amendment in light of Hurst v. Florida, Alleyne v. United States, and Apprendi v. New Jersey