Citation network
Sochor Vs. Florida
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 08, 1992
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. 527 (1992) October Term, 1991 Syllabus Sochor V. FloridaSearch
-
aggravating factor in reaching the decision to impose a death sentence. See Clemons v. MississippiSearch
-
the invalid aggravating factor or determine that weighing the invalid factor was harmless error. See, e. g., Parker v. DuggerSearch
-
clarity that its rejection of the claim was based on an alternative state ground, see, e. g., Michigan v. LongSearch
-
has said nothing to persuade the Court that this state ground is either not adequate or not independent, see Herb v. PitcairnSearch
-
held that heinousness is properly found where, as here, the defendant strangled a conscious victim. Under Walton v. ArizonaSearch
-
here. This Court will not presume that a general verdict rests on a ground that the evidence does not support. Griffin v. UnitedSearch
-
one aggravating factor when there are no mitigating circumstances does not necessarily require resentencing. Robinson v. StateSearch
-
Holton v. StateSearch
-
James v. StateSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Francois v. StateSearch
-
in comparison with other death cases, we find Sochor's sentence of death proportionate to his crime. E. g., Hitchcock v. StateSearch
-
aggravating circumstance in reaching the ultimate decision to impose a death sentence. See Clemons v. MississippiSearch
-
Clemons, supra, at 752 (citing Lockett v. OhioSearch
-
U. S. 586 (1978), and Eddings v. OklahomaSearch
-
see Parker v. DuggerSearch
-
on the heinousness factor was invalid in that the statutory definition is unconstitutionally vague, see Maynard v. CartwrightSearch
-
judge does not render wholly independent judgment, but must accord deference to the jury's recommendation. See Tedder v. StateSearch
-
Grossman v. StateSearch
-
at the jury stage taints a death sentence, even if the trial judge's decision is otherwise error free. Cf. Baldwin v. AlabamaSearch
-
of an issue of federal law if the state court's decision rests on an adequate and independent state ground, see Herb v. PitcairnSearch
-
that the state ground is an alternative holding, see Michigan v. LongSearch
-
see also Harris v. ReedSearch
-
of the complained-of jury instructions were objected to at trial, and, thus, they are not preserved for appeal. Vaught v. StateSearch
-
order to preserve an objection, a party must object after the trial judge has instructed the jury. See, e. g., Harris v. StateSearch
-
Vazquez v. StateSearch
-
Walker v. StateSearch
-
limited exception for an advance request for a specific jury instruction that is explicitly denied, see, e. g., State v. HeathcoatSearch
-
Buford v. WainwrightSearch
-
De Parias v. StateSearch
-
see 580 So. 2d, at 602-603, is an Olympic stretch, see Harris v. ReedSearch
-
See Occhicone v. StateSearch
-
weighed the heinousness factor himself. To be sure, Sochor acknowledges the rule in Walton v. ArizonaSearch
-
factor has not been subjected to the limitation of a narrow construction from the State Supreme Court. In State v. DixonSearch
-
we held in Proffitt v. FloridaSearch
-
entire Dixon statement quoted above, perhaps thinking that Proffitt approved it all. See, e. g., Porter v. StateSearch
-
Cherry v. StateSearch
-
Lucas v. StateSearch
-
has consistently held that heinousness is properly found if the defendant strangled a conscious victim. See Hitchcock v. StateSearch
-
Tompkins v. StateSearch
-
Johnson v. StateSearch
-
Adams v. StateSearch
-
So. 2d 850, cert. denied, 459 U. S. 882 (1982). Cf. Rhodes v. StateSearch
-
Herzog v. StateSearch
-
the conclusion that the trial judge was without sufficient guidance in the case at hand. See generally May nard v. CartwrightSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial