Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Walton v. Arizona, 497 U.S. 639 (1990), was a United States Supreme Court case that upheld two important aspects of the capital sentencing scheme in Arizona —judicial sentencing and the aggravating factor "especially heinous, cruel, or depraved"—as not unconstitutionally vague. The Court overruled the first of these holdings in Ring v.
The Arizona Supreme Court is the state supreme court of the U.S. state of Arizona. Sitting in the Supreme Court building in downtown Phoenix, the court consists of a chief justice, a vice chief justice, and five associate justices. Each justice is appointed by the governor of Arizona from a list recommended by a bipartisan commission.
Tison v. Arizona, 481 U.S. 137 (1987), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court qualified the rule it set forth in Enmund v. Florida (1982). Just as in Enmund, in Tison the Court applied the proportionality principle to conclude that the death penalty was an appropriate punishment for a felony murderer who was a major participant in the underlying felony and exhibited a ...
Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004), held that, in the context of mandatory sentencing guidelines under state law, the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial prohibited judges from enhancing criminal sentences based on facts other than those decided by the jury or admitted by the defendant.
On appeal in 2018, the Arizona Supreme Court upheld the death sentence. It was then appealed to the United States Supreme Court over disagreements on whether a judge or jury should resentence the defendant. As of April 2021, both McKinney and Hedlund are among 20 Arizona death row inmates who have exhausted all their appeals.
U.S. Const. amend. XIV; Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-502 (A) Clark v. Arizona, 548 U.S. 735 (2006), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld the constitutionality of the insanity defense used by Arizona. The Court affirmed the murder conviction of a man with paranoid schizophrenia for killing a police officer.
Arizona (1990) Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court applied the rule of Apprendi v. New Jersey [1] to capital sentencing schemes, holding that the Sixth Amendment requires a jury to find the aggravating factors necessary for imposing the death penalty. [2] Ring overruled a portion of Walton v.
The Arizona Supreme Court ruled on Friday that nearly 100,000 residents can receive full ballots without citizenship proof, swiftly resolving a clerical blunder that questioned whether they could ...