Citation network
Walton Vs. Arizona
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 27, 1990
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
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 639 (1990) U.S. Supreme Court Walton v. ArizonaSearch
-
U.S. 639 (1990) Walton v. ArizonaSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
that every finding of fact underlying a sentencing decision be made by a jury rather than by a judge. See Clemons v. MississippiSearch
-
death penalty, and the failure to find any particular aggravating circumstance does not preclude that penalty. Poland v. ArizonaSearch
-
U. S. 147 . Moreover, if the Constitution does not require that the finding of Enmund v. FloridaSearch
-
is virtually identical to the construction approved in Maynard v. CartwrightSearch
-
on its face, trial judges are presumed to know the law and to apply narrower definitions in their decisions. Maynard v. CartwrightSearch
-
of proof does not lessen the State's burden to prove the existence of aggravating circumstances. Cf., e.g., Martin v. OhioSearch
-
U. S. 367 , distinguished. Pp. 497 U. S. 649 -651. 2. Blystone v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
U. S. 299 , and Boyde v. CaliforniaSearch
-
longer seek to apply, and will not, here or in the future, vote to uphold a claim based upon, the principle of Woodson v. NorthSearch
-
Carolina, 428 U. S. 280 , and Lockett v. OhioSearch
-
from considering any mitigating factor. This principle is rationally irreconcilable with the principle of Furman v. GeorgiaSearch
-
the Arizona death penalty statute to be unconstitutional for the reasons submitted by Walton in this case, see Adamson v. RickettsSearch
-
challenges to Florida's death sentencing scheme, which provides for sentencing by the judge, not the jury. Hildwin v. FloridaSearch
-
But as we observed in Poland v. ArizonaSearch
-
Id. at 476 U. S. 156 (citation omitted). Our holding in Cabana v. BullockSearch
-
further support for our conclusion. Cabana held that an appellate court could constitutionally make the Enmund v. FloridaSearch
-
on what mitigating circumstances may be considered in deciding whether to impose the death penalty. See, e.g., Lockett v. OhioSearch
-
Id. at 438 U. S. 609 , and n. 16. In Martin v. OhioSearch
-
a preponderance of the evidence that she was acting in self defense when she allegedly committed the murder. In Leland v. OregonSearch
-
case, a requirement that the defense of insanity be proved beyond a reasonable doubt by the defendant, see also Rivera v. DelawareSearch
-
U. S. 877 (1976), and in Patterson v. NewSearch
-
placing on him the burden of proving mitigating circumstances sufficiently substantial to call for leniency. Mullaney v. WilburSearch
-
claimed by a defendant unless the State negated them by a preponderance of the evidence. Neither does Mills v. MarylandSearch
-
statute creates an unconstitutional presumption that death is the proper sentence. Our recent decisions in Blystone v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
U. S. 299 (1990), and Boyde v. CaliforniaSearch
-
in Woodson v. NorthSearch
-
Carolina, 428 U. S. 280 (1976), and Roberts v. LouisianaSearch
-
types of murder. 494 U.S. at 494 U. S. 305 . The same is true of the Arizona statute. Similarly, Boyde v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Id. at 494 U. S. 377 (quoting Franklin v. LynaughSearch
-
opinion)). Walton's arguments in this case are no more persuasive than those made in Blystone and Boyde. V Walton'sSearch
-
aggravating Page 497 U. S. 653 circumstance to be invalid in Maynard v. CartwrightSearch
-
circumstance to be invalid in Godfrey v. GeorgiaSearch
-
U. S. 420 (1980). Maynard v. CartwrightSearch
-
and Godfrey v. GeorgiaSearch
-
U. S. 654 state appellate court vacate a death sentence based on that factor. Rather, as we held in Clemons v. MississippiSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial