Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Ayers Vs. Belmontes

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Nov 13, 2006

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

75 entries 3 linked 72 unlinked
Show
  1. Eddings Vs. Oklahoma US Supreme Court · Jan 19, 1982
  2. Boyde Vs. California US Supreme Court · Mar 05, 1990
  3. Penry Vs. Lynaugh US Supreme Court · Jun 26, 1989
  4. Syllabus October Term, 2006 Ayers V. Belmontes
    Search
  5. The Federal District Court denied relief, but the Ninth Circuit reversed. On reconsideration in light of Brown v. Payton
    Search
  6. s precrime background and character, Boyde v. California
    Search
  7. or postcrime rehabilitation, Brown v. Payton
    Search
  8. J., joined. Stevens, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer, JJ., joined. Ayers v. Belmontes
    Search
  9. Opinion of the Court Ayers V. Belmontes
    Search
  10. Supreme Court of the United States No. 05-493 Robert L. Ayers, Jr., Acting Warden, Peti- Tioner V. Fernando
    Search
  11. of his Eighth Amendment right to present all mitigating evidence in capital sentencing proceedings. See, e.g., Penry v. Johnson
    Search
  12. Skipper v. South
    Search
  13. California Supreme Court, affirming the judgment and sentence, rejected this contention and other challenges. People v. Belmontes
    Search
  14. but a divided panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed in relevant part, Belmontes v. Woodford
    Search
  15. F. 3d 861, 908 (2003). Over the dissent of eight judges, the Court of Appeals denied rehearing en banc. Belmontes v. Woodford
    Search
  16. This Court granted certiorari, vacated the judgment, and remanded for further consideration in light of Brown v. Payton
    Search
  17. U. S. 133 (2005). Brown v. Belmontes
    Search
  18. Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), 110 Stat. 1214, though applicable in that case, does not apply here. Belmontes v. Brown
    Search
  19. Over yet another dissent, the Court of Appeals again denied rehearing en banc. Belmontes v. Stokes
    Search
  20. In two earlier cases this Court considered a constitutional challenge to the factor (k) instruction. See Brown v. Payton
    Search
  21. Id. , at 382 (citing Penry v. Lynaugh
    Search
  22. U. S., at 383 (quoting California v. Brown
    Search
  23. s effective date. AEDPA and its deferential standards of review are thus inapplicable. See Woodford v. Garceau
    Search
  24. quoting Lockett v. Ohio
    Search
  25. cf. Johnson v. Texas
    Search
  26. see generally Tuilaepa v. California
    Search
  27. s holding in Johnson v. Texas
    Search
  28. and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. It is so ordered. Ayers v. Belmontes
    Search
  29. s discretion to consider all mitigating evidence does not violate the Eighth Amendment. See Walton v. Arizona
    Search
  30. s jurisprudence to the contrary, however, this is arguably an easy case, given our reiteration in Johnson v. Texas
    Search
  31. Scannlain did below, see Belmontes v. Brown
    Search
  32. s opinion, which correctly applies Boyde v. California
    Search
  33. U. S. 370 (1990). Ayers v. Belmontes
    Search
  34. Stevens, J., Dissenting Ayers V. Belmontes
    Search
  35. Justice Stevens, with whom Justice Souter, Justice Ginsburg, and Justice Breyer join, dissenting. In Lockett v. Ohio
    Search
  36. here, Fernando Belmontes, was sentenced to death in 1982, a scant four years after Lockett . See People v. Belmontes
    Search
  37. s culpability for the crime, might nevertheless call for a sentence less than death. Cf. People v. Easley
    Search
  38. s sentencing the California Supreme Court evinced considerable discomfort with factor (k). In People v. Easley
    Search
  39. proved prescient. In Skipper v. South
    Search
  40. s conviction and therefore fully applicable here, see Griffith v. Kentucky
    Search
  41. the jury was tasked with performing. Id., at 150. V Questions
    Search
  42. listed factors gave the jury the chance to consider whether the respondent might redeem himself in prison. Cf. Brown v. Payton
    Search
  43. s death sentence. See Boyde v. California
    Search
  44. the lawyers thought it meant. Surely the more natural inference is that the jury followed its instructions. See Greer v. Miller
    Search
  45. a risk of error sufficient to warrant relief for a man who has spent more than half his life on death row. Cf. Lackey v. Texas
    Search
  46. s decision to take the life of one of its citizens. See Gardner v. Florida
    Search
  47. Footnote 4 Skipper v. South
    Search
  48. s suggestion that this case may be in- consistent with Johnson v. Texas
    Search
  49. of Brown v. Payton
    Search
  50. Brown v. Payton
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial