Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Spaziano Vs. Florida

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jul 02, 1984

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

73 entries 7 linked 66 unlinked
Show
  1. Furman Vs. Georgia US Supreme Court · Jun 29, 1972
  2. Jurek Vs. Texas US Supreme Court · Jul 02, 1976
  3. Duncan Vs. Louisiana US Supreme Court · May 20, 1968
  4. Witherspoon Vs. Illinois US Supreme Court · Jun 03, 1968
  5. Coker Vs. Georgia US Supreme Court · Jun 29, 1977
  6. Gregg Vs. Georgia US Supreme Court · Jul 02, 1976
    Relied / Followed
  7. Proffitt Vs. Florida US Supreme Court · Jul 02, 1976
  8. U.S. 447 (1984) U.S. Supreme Court Spaziano v. Florida
    Search
  9. U.S. 447 (1984) Spaziano v. Florida
    Search
  10. in support thereof. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, rejecting petitioner's contention that Beck v. Alabama
    Search
  11. On the facts, it was not error for the trial judge to refuse to instruct the jury on lesser included offenses. Beck v. Alabama
    Search
  12. drugs on the day of the visit to the garbage dump, and he had been able to direct the police to the site. See Spaziano v. State
    Search
  13. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Florida affirmed the conviction, but reversed the death sentence. Spaziano v. State
    Search
  14. petitioner had not been convicted. Neither party had received a copy of that confidential portion. Relying on Gardner v. Florida
    Search
  15. to present evidence in response. In a memorandum of supplemental authority, petitioner also urged that Beck v. Alabama
    Search
  16. allowing the jury's recommendation to be binding would Page 468 U. S. 454 violate the requirements of Furman v. Georgia
    Search
  17. meets the clear and convincing test to allow override of the jury's recommendation in accordance with . . . Tedder v. State
    Search
  18. II We turn first to the trial court's refusal to give an instruction on lesser included offenses. In Beck v. Alabama
    Search
  19. of convicting the defendant of a lesser included offense. Id. at 447 U. S. 637 . See also Keeble v. United
    Search
  20. Amendment's Double Jeopardy Clause made applicable to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment. See Benton v. Maryland
    Search
  21. sentencing is so much like a trial on guilt or innocence that it is controlled by the Court's decision in Duncan v. Louisiana
    Search
  22. that a capital proceeding in many respects resembles a trial on the issue of guilt or innocence. See Bullington v. Missouri
    Search
  23. efforts to persuade a sentencer to impose the death penalty. Id. at 451 U. S. 445 , quoting Green v. United
    Search
  24. Arizona v. Page
    Search
  25. evaluate the unique circumstances of the individual defendant and the sentencer's decision for life is final. Arizona v. Rumsey
    Search
  26. sentencing proceeding -- a determination of the appropriate punishment to be imposed on an individual. See Lockett v. Ohio
    Search
  27. Woodson v. North
    Search
  28. U. S. 280 , 428 U. S. 304 (1976) (plurality opinion), citing Pennsylvania ex rel. Sullivan v. Ashe
    Search
  29. U. S. 51 , 302 U. S. 55 (1937), and Williams v. New
    Search
  30. of the death penalty requires the benefit of a jury. In Furman v. Georgia
    Search
  31. of its conclusion that, under those statutes, the penalty was applied arbitrarily and discriminatorily. See also Gregg v. Georgia
    Search
  32. Eddings Page 468 U. S. 460 v. Oklahoma
    Search
  33. distinguish between those individuals for whom death is an appropriate sanction and those for whom it is not. Zant v. Stephens
    Search
  34. allow the sentencer to consider the individual circumstances of the defendant, his background, and his crime. Lockett v. Ohio
    Search
  35. the risk that jury sentencing will result in arbitrary or discriminatory application of the death penalty, see Gregg v. Georgia
    Search
  36. cases. Whatever the sentence, its deterrent function is primarily a consideration for the legislature. Gregg v. Georgia
    Search
  37. the discretion of the sentencing authority, whether judge or jury, must be limited and reviewable. See, e.g., Gregg v. Georgia
    Search
  38. the death penalty is authorized and the particular circumstances in which death is appropriate are defined. See Gregg v. Georgia
    Search
  39. as a link between the community and the penal system and as a bulwark between the accused and the State. See Gregg v. Georgia
    Search
  40. Williams v. Florida
    Search
  41. is violated by a challenged practice. See Enmund v. Florida
    Search
  42. are unwilling to say that there is any one right way for a State to set up its capital sentencing scheme. See Pulley v. Harris
    Search
  43. and his circumstances and ensuring that the penalty is not imposed arbitrarily or discriminatorily. Barclay v. Florida
    Search
  44. after receiving the advice of the jury. The advice does not become a judgment simply because it comes from the jury. v. Petitioner's
    Search
  45. Florida Supreme Court has announced for allowing a trial court to override a jury's recommendation of life. See Tedder v. State
    Search
  46. has recognized the significant safeguard the Tedder standard affords a capital defendant in Florida. See Dobbert v. Florida
    Search
  47. U.S. Supreme Court Spaziano v. Florida
    Search
  48. Beck v. Alabama
    Search
  49. See Spaziano v. State
    Search
  50. Spaziano v. State
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial