Citation network
Yates Vs. Aiken
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jan 12, 1988
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. 211 (1988) U.S. Supreme Court Yates v. AikenSearch
-
U.S. 211 (1988) Yates v. AikenSearch
-
arguing, inter alia, that the burden-shifting instruction given at trial was unconstitutional under Sandstrom v. MontanaSearch
-
was pending, petitioner also called to the state court's attention this Court's subsequent decision in Francis v. FranklinSearch
-
and sentenced to death. His conviction and sentence were affirmed by the South Carolina Supreme Court in 1982. State v. YatesSearch
-
was affirmed, the South Carolina Supreme Court held that it was error to give such an instruction. See State v. ElmoreSearch
-
his trial was unconstitutional under the state court's reasoning in Elmore and under our decision in Sandstrom v. MontanaSearch
-
was pending, we decided another Page 484 U. S. 213 case involving a burden-shifting instruction, Francis v. FranklinSearch
-
for further consideration in light of Francis v. FranklinSearch
-
suffered from the same infirmities present in Elmore and addressed in Francis v. FranklinSearch
-
conviction that was final when Elmore was decided. The opinion did not consider whether the decision in Francis v. FranklinSearch
-
might apply retroactively, and also did not discuss our decision in Sandstrom v. MontanaSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
on which petitioner had relied. In dissent, Justice Finney reasoned that Elmore and Francis v. FranklinSearch
-
substantially impairs the truthfinding function of the jury. Moreover, he reasoned, given our decision in Sandstrom v. MontanaSearch
-
We now reverse. I Our order remanding the case for further consideration in the light of Francis v. FranklinSearch
-
the State of its burden of persuasion beyond a reasonable doubt of every essential element of a crime. Sandstrom v. MontanaSearch
-
Patterson v. NewSearch
-
Morissette v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. at 397 U. S. 372 . See Speiser v. RandallSearch
-
Mackey v. UnitedSearch
-
We have already endorsed Justice Harlan's retroactivity analysis for cases pending on direct appeal, see Griffith v. KentuckySearch
-
United States v. JohnsonSearch
-
Desist v. UnitedSearch
-
Harlan, J., dissenting), the important distinction between direct review and collateral review. Compare Allen v. HardySearch
-
U. S. 255 (1986) (holding that Batson v. KentuckySearch
-
Pennsylvania v. FinleySearch
-
was Page 484 U. S. 217 merely an application of the principle that governed our decision in Sandstrom v. MontanaSearch
-
The doctrine against burden-shifting presumptions set out in Francis v. FranklinSearch
-
is not a clear break with prior law. The United States Supreme Court in Sandstrom v. MontanaSearch
-
We stated in United States v. JohnsonSearch
-
Truesdale v. AikenSearch
-
Dunaway v. NewSearch
-
Lee v. MissouriSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Yates v. AikenSearch
-
Francis v. FranklinSearch
-
State v. YatesSearch
-
See State v. ElmoreSearch
-
of Francis v. FranklinSearch
-
Elmore and Francis v. FranklinSearch
-
Morissette v. UnitedSearch
-
See Speiser v. RandallSearch
-
Griffith v. KentuckySearch
-
Compare Allen v. HardySearch
-
Batson v. KentuckySearch
-
Pennsylvania v. FinleySearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial