Search for: ""Ring v. Arizona" OR "536 U.S. 584""
Results 1 - 20
of 23
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Mar 2015, 7:07 am
Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002).Judge Martinez may be vindicated after all. [read post]
17 Aug 2022, 5:21 pm
Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002)) in habeas proceedings. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 1:08 pm
Arizona, 536 U.S. 584, 609 (2002). [read post]
23 Oct 2012, 7:15 pm
Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002). [read post]
29 Jan 2012, 4:17 am
Ring v. [read post]
16 Sep 2019, 10:07 am
Arizona, 536 U.S. 584, 597-598, n. 4 (2002), the question decided was unambiguously limited to the finding of the aggravating circumstance, not the weighing. [read post]
12 Oct 2014, 8:35 am
Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002); and (7) the death penalty is not proportionate in this case. [read post]
2 Aug 2011, 1:22 pm
Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002), and was therefore unconstitutional. [read post]
18 Mar 2019, 7:48 am
Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002)? [read post]
15 Feb 2016, 10:40 am
See, e.g., Ring v. [read post]
15 Jan 2016, 7:26 am
Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002), where the court held that the Sixth Amendment requires that a jury, rather than a judge, must determine any fact upon which a legislature conditions an increase in the maximum punishment for a criminal offense. [read post]
15 Jan 2016, 7:26 am
Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002), where the court held that the Sixth Amendment requires that a jury, rather than a judge, must determine any fact upon which a legislature conditions an increase in the maximum punishment for a criminal offense. [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]
15 Dec 2009, 12:16 pm
Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002) King, How Different is Death, Jury Sentencing in Capital and Non-Capital Cases Compared, 2 Ohio St. [read post]
21 Jan 2016, 1:46 pm
Arizona, 536 U.S. 584, 597-598, n. 4 (2002) very explicitly confines its jury trial holding to the eligibility decision, i.e., the finding of at least one aggravating circumstance, and not to the weighing or the ultimate penalty decision.Did the Supreme Court in Hurst v. [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 12:21 pm
Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002). [read post]
9 Mar 2015, 12:48 pm
Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002). [read post]
11 Sep 2006, 12:17 pm
Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002), which applied Apprendi in holding that a jury, and not a judge, must find the existence of aggravating circumstances that warrant the death penalty. [read post]
30 Nov 2008, 4:24 pm
Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002). [read post]