1. Does the Florida Supreme Court's partial retro activity decision, which lim its the class of deathsentenced individuals entitled to a jury de termination of their sentence pursuant to Hurst v. Florida , 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016), violate the Eighth and F ourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution?

2. Does the partial retro activity formula employed for Hurst errors in Florida violate the Supremacy Clause of the United St ates Constitution in light of Montgomery v. Louisiana , 136 S. Ct. 718 (2016)?

3. Does the Florida Supreme Court's holding that a Hurst error is per se harmless where a jury issues a generalized unanimous recommendation for death – after receiving instructions that the judge would make both the findings of facts nece ssary for a death sentence and render the final decision on the death penalty – cont ravene the Eighth Amendment under Caldwell v. Mississippi , 472 U.S. 320 (1985)?

Does the Florida Supreme Court's partial retroactivity decision violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments?