Citation network
Caldwell Vs. Mississippi
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 11, 1985
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
-
U.S. 320 (1985) U.S. Supreme Court Caldwell v. MississippiSearch
-
U.S. 320 (1985) Caldwell v. MississippiSearch
-
the conviction, but affirmed the death sentence by an equally divided court, rejecting, in reliance on California v. RamosSearch
-
Woodson v. NorthSearch
-
the jury's deliberations because of anything defense counsel said. Pp. 472 U. S. 336 -337. 5. Donnelly v. DeChristoforoSearch
-
JUSTICE BLACKMUN, and JUSTICE STEVENS, delivered an opinion with respect to Part IV-A, concluding that California v. RamosSearch
-
the sentence by an equally divided court. 443 So.2d 806 (1983). Relying on this Court's decision in California v. RamosSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
issue because the decision of the Mississippi Supreme Court rests on adequate and independent state grounds. See Herb v. PitcairnSearch
-
have relied on the procedural bar as an independent basis for its disposition of the case. See Ulster County Court v. AllenSearch
-
Prueitt v. StateSearch
-
plain error. . . .' Bell v. StateSearch
-
in other capital cases, where it has a number of times declined to invoke procedural bars. See, e.g., Williams v. StateSearch
-
Culberson v. StateSearch
-
where counsel failed to follow Rule requiring prior objections to jury instructions). Given the standards of Michigan v. LongSearch
-
process should facilitate the responsible and reliable exercise of sentencing discretion. See, e.g., Eddings v. OklahomaSearch
-
specific human being should die at the hands of the State. Thus, as long ago as the pre- Furman case of McGautha v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Carolina, supra, at 428 U. S. 305 (plurality opinion). See also Eddings v. OklahomaSearch
-
correctly assume that a sentence of life in prison could not be increased to a death sentence on appeal. See Arizona v. RumseySearch
-
guidance as to how their judgment should be exercised, leaving them with substantial discretion. See, e.g., Eddings v. OklahomaSearch
-
this has been the view of almost all of the State Supreme Courts that have dealt with this question since Furman v. GeorgiaSearch
-
that arguments very similar to that used here are sufficiently improper to merit vacating a death sentence. See Wiley v. StateSearch
-
Williams v. StateSearch
-
the death sentence should be upheld despite the prosecutor's comments. First, the State argues that, under California v. RamosSearch
-
to defense counsel's arguments. Last, the State asserts that an application of this Court's decision in Donnelly v. DeChristoforoSearch
-
A Both respondent and the prevailing justices of the Mississippi Supreme Court interpreted California v. RamosSearch
-
argument regarding the context of the prosecutor's comments by arguing that, under this Court's decision in Donnelly v. DeChristoforoSearch
-
Id. at 416 U. S. 643 (citing Griffin v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Page 472 U. S. 341 v. ThisSearch
-
assistance would be beneficial, we find no deprivation of due process in the trial judge's decision. Cf. Ake v. OklahomaSearch
-
Barefoot v. EstelleSearch
-
Hawes v. StateSearch
-
Fleming v. StateSearch
-
State v. WillieSearch
-
State v. JonesSearch
-
State v. WhiteSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Caldwell v. MississippiSearch
-
See Herb v. PitcairnSearch
-
See Ulster County Court v. AllenSearch
-
Bell v. StateSearch
-
of Michigan v. LongSearch
-
of McGautha v. CaliforniaSearch
-
See Arizona v. RumseySearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial