Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Capital punishment is a legal penalty in the U.S. state of Oklahoma. The state has executed the second-largest number of convicts in the United States (after Texas) since re-legalization following Gregg v. Georgia in 1976. [1] Oklahoma also has the highest number of executions per capita in the United States. [2]
Skinner v. State of Oklahoma, ex rel. Williamson, 316 U.S. 535 (1942), is a unanimous United States Supreme Court ruling [1] that held that laws permitting the compulsory sterilization of criminals are unconstitutional as it violates a person's rights given under the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution, specifically the Equal Protection Clause and the Due Process Clause.
The Oklahoma Survivors’ Act lets domestic violence victims seek a sentence modification if they can show their abuse contributed to the crime. Oklahoma prosecutor accused of undermining abuse ...
Whether due process of law requires reversal, where a capital conviction is so infected with errors that the State no longer seeks to defend it. 4. Whether the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals' holding that the Oklahoma Post-Conviction Procedure Act precluded post-conviction relief is an adequate and independent state ground for the judgment.
An abuse of process is the unjustified or unreasonable use of legal proceedings or process to further a cause of action by an applicant or plaintiff in an action. It is a claim made by the respondent or defendant that the other party is misusing or perverting regularly issued court process (civil or criminal) not justified by the underlying legal action.
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
Thompson v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 815 (1988), was the first case since the moratorium on capital punishment was lifted in the United States in which the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the death sentence of a minor on grounds of "cruel and unusual punishment." [1] The holding in Thompson was expanded on by Roper v.