▁to ▁find ▁Franklin ▁and ▁Joy ce ▁guilty ▁of ▁the ▁less er ▁crime . ▁ ▁Since ▁the ▁Florida ▁Supreme ▁Court ▁r uling ▁let ▁stand ▁conv ict ions ▁made ▁before ▁ 1 9 7 1 , ▁in ▁W ain w right ▁v . ▁Stone ▁two ▁in m ates ▁conv icted ▁under ▁the ▁ 1 8 6 8 ▁stat ute , ▁Raymond ▁Stone ▁and ▁Eug ene ▁H uff man , ▁brought ▁a ▁case ▁of ▁habe as ▁cor pus ▁before ▁a ▁federal ▁court , ▁arg uing ▁that ▁the ▁Florida ▁stat ute ▁was ▁un const itution al . ▁ ▁The ▁U . ▁S . ▁Court ▁of ▁App e als ▁for ▁the ▁Fif th ▁Circ uit ▁agreed , ▁but ▁on ▁November ▁ 5 , ▁ 1 9 7 3 , ▁the ▁United ▁States ▁Supreme ▁Court ▁revers ed ▁the ▁app ell ate ▁court ▁decision ▁and ▁aff ir med ▁the ▁men ' s ▁conv ict ions ▁in ▁accord ance ▁with ▁the ▁Florida ▁Supreme ▁Court ' s ▁right ▁to ▁declare ▁its ▁r uling ▁not ▁retro act ively ▁effective . ▁ ▁Other ▁cases ▁In ▁other ▁cases ▁after ▁ 1 9 7 1 , ▁the ▁Florida ▁Supreme ▁Court ▁held ▁that ▁the ▁average ▁citiz en ▁of ▁the ▁time ▁would ▁be ▁b aff led ▁by ▁the ▁meaning ▁of ▁" det est able ▁and ▁ab omin able ▁crime ▁against ▁nature " ▁( written ▁in ▁ 1 8 6 8 ) ▁but ▁would ▁clearly ▁understand ▁that ▁the ▁phrase ▁" unn atural ▁and ▁las c iv ious ▁act " ▁( written ▁in ▁ 1 9 1 7 ) ▁referred