ONE: Petitioner Tina Brown sought state postconviction relief from a 2012 death sentence imposed under the procedure subsequently held unconstitutional in Hurst v. Florida. The Florida Supreme Court denied relief, holding (a) that it is constitutionally permissible to execute a death sentence based on a guilt-stage jury finding of an element of first-degree murder which tracks any aggravating factor required in order to make the first-degree murder death-eligible, and (b) that such a finding needs not be actually made by a jury but can be imputed by an appellate court to a guilt-phase jury verdict which must "have logically concluded" that the element was found, and (c) that such a logical conclusion could be drawn even though the case was submitted to the jury under alternative theories of guilt, only one of which required such a finding. Does this procedure violate the Sixth, Eighth or Fourteenth Amendments? (This question includes the subquestions (1) whether Almendarez Torres v. United States remains good law in the wake of Hurst and Caldwell v. Mississippi and, if so, (2) whether Mathis v. United States or Stromberg v. California precludes the Florida Supreme Court's finding-by-imputation procedure.)

TWO: Does the Eighth or the Fourteenth Amendment tolerate a death sentence imposed through a process which denies the jury any responsible role in the selection stage capital-sentencing decision? (This question includes the subquestions (1) whether these amendments require that the ultimate choice between life and death be made by a unanimous jury, or (2) if not, whether that choice must at least be made by a plurality of a jury, or (3) if not, whether a jury must at least be given some meaningful input into the life-or-death selection-stage decision.)

THREE: The procedure described in Question Presented ONE was announced by the Florida Supreme Court in an opinion which overruled that Court's earlier (2016) implementation of Hurst v. Florida and revalidated death sentences which the 2016 ruling had held impermissible. Does this volte-face violate the guarantees of Article I, § 10 or the Fourteenth Amendment's due process prohibition of ex post facto liability?

Whether the Florida Supreme Court's procedure for imposing a death sentence violates the Sixth, Eighth, or Fourteenth Amendments