Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972), was a landmark criminal case in which the United States Supreme Court decided that arbitrary and inconsistent imposition of the death penalty violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, and constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.
The U.S. Supreme Court has issued numerous rulings on the use of capital punishment (the death penalty). While some rulings applied very narrowly, perhaps to only one individual, other cases have had great influence over wide areas of procedure, eligible crimes, acceptable evidence and method of execution.
Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399 (1986), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the common law rule that the insane cannot be executed; therefore the petitioner is entitled to a competency evaluation and to an evidentiary hearing in court on the question of their competency to be executed.
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that under the Due Process Clause of the Constitution of the United States, the prosecution must turn over to a criminal defendant any significant evidence in its possession that suggests the defendant is not guilty (exculpatory evidence).
Panetti v. Quarterman, 551 U.S. 930 (2007), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States, ruling that criminal defendants sentenced to death may not be executed if they do not understand the reason for their imminent execution, and that once the state has set an execution date death-row inmates may litigate their competency to be executed in habeas corpus proceedings. [1]
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected an Alabama death row inmate’s last-minute request for a stay of execution, moving him a step closer to being put to death using an untested ...
A death row inmate in Missouri who has long claimed his innocence and is scheduled to be executed in less than one week asked the US Supreme Court on Wednesday for a stay of execution, arguing his ...
Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Missouri: Holding; Missouri may, consistent with the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, require that an incompetent's wish to discontinue life support be proven by clear and convincing evidence before life-sustaining treatment may be withdrawn. Court membership; Chief Justice William Rehnquist ...