Final answer:
a) True
The Florida Supreme Court held that Hurst is retroactive if the defendant was sentenced at or after the Ring decision. The statement is true.
Step-by-step explanation:
The Florida Supreme Court held that Hurst is retroactive if the defendant was sentenced at or after the Ring decision.
The question is asking whether the statement is true or false. In this case, the statement is true.
In the case of Hurst v. Florida, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Florida's death penalty sentencing procedure was unconstitutional because it allowed judges, rather than juries, to determine the existence of aggravating factors necessary for imposing the death penalty. The decision in Ring v. Arizona expanded on this ruling, stating that the determination of such aggravating factors must be made by the jury, not the judge. Based on these decisions, the Florida Supreme Court held that the Hurst decision should be applied retroactively to cases where the defendant was sentenced at or after the Ring decision.