Final answer:
The student's question surrounds the implementation of the Hurst decision by the Florida Supreme Court in relation to the Ring decision, indicating which defendants may be affected by changes in death penalty sentencing based on constitutional precedents set by the U.S. Supreme Court in cases that shaped capital punishment jurisprudence.
Step-by-step explanation:
The subject question pertains to the retroactivity of the Hurst decision by the Florida Supreme Court in light of the prior Ring decision. Specifically, it deals with when defendants sentenced to death may be entitled to reconsideration of their sentences, harking back to the constitutional principles affirmed in cases such as Proffitt v. Florida and Jurek v. Texas, which upheld new death penalty statutes with guidelines to ensure the fair imposition of the death penalty, and Gregg v. Georgia, which reaffirmed the constitutionality of the death penalty under revised state statutes.
Notably, the Supreme Court has issued rulings that affect the application of the death penalty, including Graham v. Florida, barring life imprisonment without parole for juvenile non-homicide offenders; prohibiting the execution of individuals with intellectual disabilities as in Atkins; and declaring mandatory death sentences unconstitutional as in Roberts v. Louisiana. The Court has also broadened constitutional protections, such as the right to counsel in state felony cases (Gideon v. Wainwright), ensuring due process and equal protection.