Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Harris, 465 U.S. 37 (1984) — A state appellate court, before it affirms a death sentence, is not required to compare the sentence in the case before it with the penalties imposed in similar cases if requested to do so by the prisoner. Whitmore v. Arkansas, 495 U.S. 149 (1990) — Mandatory appellate review is not required in death penalty cases.
Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005), is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held that it is unconstitutional to impose capital punishment for crimes committed while under the age of 18. [1]
The drawback of having juries rather than judges fix the penalty in capital cases is the risk that they will have no frame of reference for imposing the death penalty in a rational manner. Although this problem may not be totally correctible, the Court trusted that the guidance given the jury by the aggravating factors or other special-verdict ...
The 20-year-old Supreme Court decision declared that defense lawyers in death penalty cases must thoroughly investigate the lives ... Thomas had denied the appeal of the man convicted and ...
The death penalty is sought in only a fraction of murder cases, ... the death penalty is sought cost about 50% more than those where it is not, and 29% of these sentences are overturned on appeal.
The scheduled execution of a death row inmate whose case has drawn widespread scrutiny was halted by the Texas Supreme Court late Thursday night as doubts linger over whether his decades-old ...
In the United States, all death sentences are automatically stayed pending a direct review by an appeals court. If the death sentence is found to be legally sound, the stay is lifted. One example of a stay of execution in the death penalty context was the James Autry case. Autry was already strapped down to the execution table in Texas on 4 ...
Moore v. Texas, 137 S. Ct. 1039 (2017), is a United States Supreme Court decision about the death penalty and intellectual disability.The court held that contemporary clinical standards determine what an intellectual disability is, and held that even milder forms of intellectual disability may bar a person from being sentenced to death due to the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel ...