Important Notice: Our web hosting provider recently started charging us for additional visits, which was unexpected. In response, we're seeking donations. Depending on the situation, we may explore different monetization options for our Community and Expert Contributors. It's crucial to provide more returns for their expertise and offer more Expert Validated Answers or AI Validated Answers. Learn more about our hosting issue here.

Did Ring v. Arizona Merely Announce a Non-Retroactive Procedural Rule?

0
Posted

Did Ring v. Arizona Merely Announce a Non-Retroactive Procedural Rule?

0

Schriro v. Summerlin Docket No. 03-526 From: The Ninth Circuit Case at a Glance In 2002, the Supreme Court held that the Sixth Amendment requires that juries not judges must determine capital sentences. In 1984, Summerlin was convicted of murder in Arizona, and a drug-abusing judge determined his sentence. Now, the Court must consider whether its 2002 case applies retroactively to Summerlin’s case. • Previewed by Kathy Swedlow, co-director of the Innocence Project and an assistant professor at the Thomas M. Cooley Law School in Lansing, Michigan.

Related Questions

What is your question?

*Sadly, we had to bring back ads too. Hopefully more targeted.