Search for: "Ring v. Arizona"
Results 121 - 140
of 209
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 May 2014, 9:05 am
This has led him to support proposals for state RFRAs with broad definitions, like the one recently vetoed in Arizona, and also to file an amicus brief on behalf of employer Hobby Lobby in Sebelius v. [read post]
14 Feb 2017, 11:06 am
Orlando Sentinel journalist Gal Tziperman reports that the court's 5-2 opinion held that because the sentencing jury was unanimous in sentencing murderer Enoch Hall to death, his sentence did not violate the Supreme Court's Ring v. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 2:56 pm
Arizona applies to Florida’s capital sentencing scheme, which requires a judge to impose a sentence after considering the jury’s (potentially non-unanimous) recommendation. [read post]
27 Sep 2007, 11:10 am
States requiring 60 days' notice are: Arizona (Ariz.Rev.Stat. [read post]
20 Jul 2017, 11:30 am
Similar laws have been passed in Arizona and Kansas.None of them comport with the First Amendment. [read post]
24 Apr 2015, 12:02 pm
The jury instruction was thus proper under Gonzales v. [read post]
6 Jun 2019, 8:07 am
Now, after Ring v. [read post]
21 Sep 2015, 8:35 am
New Jersey (2000) and its capital follow-on, Ring v. [read post]
6 Nov 2013, 6:31 am
Howell also raises a Ring v. [read post]
15 Jan 2016, 7:26 am
The Court determined that this procedure is unconstitutional in light of Ring v. [read post]
28 Jun 2011, 12:27 pm
More on Ring v. [read post]
15 Jan 2016, 7:26 am
The Court determined that this procedure is unconstitutional in light of Ring v. [read post]
2 Apr 2009, 10:21 am
ARIZONA, 536 U.S. 584 (2002), CONGRESS UNCONSTITUTIONALLY DELEGATED TO THE PRESIDENT THE POWER TO ENACT THE FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT OF ELEMENTS OF CAPITAL MURDER, A PURELY LEGISLATIVE FUNCTIONCLAIM SEVENTEENTHE PROPORTIONALITY REVIEW IN THIS CASE WAS INSUFFICIENT AS A MATTER OF LAW IN VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH, SIXTH AND EIGHTH AMENDMENTSCLAIM EIGHTEENTHE MANNER IN WHICH THE GOVERNMENT WOULD CARRY OUT PETITIONER'S EXECUTION VIOLATES THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT [read post]
19 Nov 2013, 12:04 pm
New Jersey and Ring v. [read post]
17 Mar 2022, 11:59 am
Ring, 202 Ariz. 310, 316, ¶ 22, 44 P.3d 990, 996 (2002); Little v. [read post]
6 Apr 2009, 8:14 am
I want that word to ring in your ears. [read post]
25 Sep 2020, 1:42 pm
Bauman and Ring v. [read post]
21 Nov 2010, 5:10 pm
New Jersey and Ring v. [read post]
19 Apr 2010, 11:12 pm
” Ring v. [read post]
12 Oct 2012, 8:52 am
See In re Arizona Fast Foods, 299 B.R. 589 (Bankr. [read post]
