@chrisgeidner this seems fairly straightforward. If Teague retroactivity didn't apply in Ring, it won't apply here.
-
-
-
@TheFoyeEffect Second: There is obviously ~some question~ — or Fla. Sup. Ct. wouldn't have asked the 2nd and 3rd questions. -
@chrisgeidner I feel like this is the relevant passage here. Feels different here http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/2015/sc13-865.pdf …pic.twitter.com/ATg3EWiuZK
-
@TheFoyeEffect OK. ... Thanks. ... We'll see what the state briefs on Friday, and what's in the reply next week. -
@chrisgeidner it was interesting that SCOTUS didn't address unanimity.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.