green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
16.7 score
“he reasonable doubt standard simply has no application to the weighing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances.”
Treatment trajectory · 1983 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1983
2004
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
State of Missouri v. Craig Michael Wood
he reasonable doubt standard simply has no application to the weighing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Nunley
(2×)
United States v. Sampson, 486 F.3d 13, 32 (1st Cir.2007) ("As other courts have recognized, the requisite weighing constitutes a process, not a fact to be found."); United States v. Purkey, 428 F.3d 738, 750 (8th Cir.2005) (characterizing the weighing process as "the lens through which the jury must focus the facts that it has found" to reach its individualized determination); Ford v. Strickland, 696 F.2d 804, 818 (11th Cir.1983) ("While the existence of an aggravating or mitigating circumstance is a fact susceptible to proof under a reasonable doubt or preponderance standard,. . . the relativ…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Sampson
See United States v. Purkey, 428 F.3d 738, 750 (8th Cir. 2005) (characterizing the weighing process as "the lens through which the jury must focus the facts that it has found" to reach its individualized determination), cert. denied, 127 S. Ct. 433 (2006); see also Ford v. Strickland, 696 F.2d 804, 818 (11th Cir. 1983); Gray v. Lucas, 685 F.2d 139, 140 (5th Cir. 1982) (per curiam).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Gary Lee Sampson
See United States v. Purkey, 428 F.3d 738, 750 (8th Cir.2005) (characterizing the weighing process as “the lens through which the jury must focus the facts that it has found” to reach its individualized determination), cert, denied, - U.S.-, 127 S.Ct. 433 , 166 L.Ed.2d 307 (2006); see also Ford v. Strickland, 696 F.2d 804, 818 (11th Cir.1983); Gray v. Lucas, 685 F.2d 139, 140 (5th Cir.1982) (per curiam).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Evans v. Thigpen
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
Gray v. Lucas, 685 F.2d 139, 140 (5th Cir.1982).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Edwards v. Thigpen
Accordingly, this case falls within the Fifth Circuit’s holding in Gray v. Lucas, 685 F.2d 139, 140 (5th Cir.1982).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Howard v. State
See Grayson v. State, 806 So.2d 241, 252 (Miss.2001); Simmons v. State, 805 So.2d 452, 507 (Miss.2001); Edwards v. State, 737 So.2d 275, 307 (Miss.1999); Berry v. State, 703 So.2d 269, 286 (Miss.1997); Evans v. State, 725 So.2d 613, 683-84 (Miss.1997); West v. State, 725 So.2d 872, 894-95 (Miss.1998); Holland v. State, 705 So.2d 307, 319-20 (Miss.1997); Gray v. State, 351 So.2d 1342, 1344 (Miss.1977); Bell v. Watkins, 381 So.2d 118, 124 (Miss.1980); See also Gray v. Lucas, 677 F.2d 1086, 1104 (5th Cir.), reh'g denied, 685 F.2d 139 (5th Cir.1982).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Walker v. State
See Grayson v. State, 806 So.2d 241 , 252 (Miss.2001); Simmons v. State, 805 So.2d 452, 507 (Miss.2001); Edwards v. State, 737 So.2d 275, 307 (Miss.1999); Berry v. State, 703 So.2d 269, 286 (Miss.1997); Evans v. State, 725 So.2d 613, 683-84 (Miss. 1997); West v. State, 725 So.2d 872, 894-95 (Miss.1998); Holland v. State, 705 So.2d 307, 319-20 (Miss.1997); Gray v. State, 351 So.2d 1342, 1344 (Miss.1977); Bell v. Watkins, 381 So.2d 118, 124 (Miss.1980); See also Gray v. Lucas, 677 2d 1086, 1104 (5th Cir.), reh'g denied, 685 F.2d 139 (5th Cir. 1982).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Eddie Lee Howard, Jr. v. State of Mississippi
See Grayson v. State, 806 So. 2d 241, 252 (Miss. 2001); Simmons v. State, 805 So. 2d 452, 507 (Miss. 2001); Edwards v. State, 737 So. 2d 275, 307 (Miss. 1999); Berry v. State, 703 So. 2d 269, 286 (Miss. 1997); Evans v. State, 725 So. 2d 613, 683-84 (Miss. 1997); West v. State, 725 So. 2d 872, 894-95 (Miss. 1998); Holland v. State, 705 So. 2d 307, 319-20 (Miss. 1997); Gray v. State, 351 So. 2d 1342, 1344 (Miss. 1977); Bell v. Watkins, 381 So. 2d 118, 124 (Miss. 1980); See also Gray v. Lucas, 677 F.2d 1086, 1104 (5th Cir.), reh'g denied, 685 F.2d 139 (5th Cir. 1982).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Alan Dale Walker v. State of Mississippi
See Grayson v. State, 806 So.2d 241, 252 (Miss. 2001); Simmons v. State, 805 So.2d 452, 507 (Miss. 2001); Edwards v. State, 737 So.2d 275, 307 (Miss. 1999); Berry v. State, 703 So.2d 269, 286 (Miss. 1997); Evans v. State, 725 So.2d 613, 683-84 (Miss. 1997); West v. State, 725 So.2d 872, 894-95 (Miss. 199S); Holland v. State, 705 So.2d 307, 319-20 (Miss. 1997); Gray v. State, 351 So.2d 1342, 1344 (Miss. 1977); Bell v. Watkins, So.2d 118,124 (Miss. 1980); See also Gray v. Lucas, 671 2d 1086,1104 (5th Cir.), reh’g denied, 685 F.2d 139 (5th Cir. 1982).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Danny L. GRIFFIN, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
OCEANIC CONTRACTORS, INC., Defendant-Appellee
v.
OCEANIC CONTRACTORS, INC., Defendant-Appellee
80-1599.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Aug 25, 1982.
Friedman & Chaffin, Robert A. Chaffin, Houston, Tex., for plaintiff-appellant., Fulbright & Jaworski, Theodore Goller, Houston, Tex., for defendant-appellee.
Brown, Per Curiam, Politz, Tate.
Published
ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
PER CURIAM:The judgment of this Court, affirming the decision of the district court, 664 F.2d 36 (5th Cir. 1981), having been reversed in part by the Supreme Court and the case having been “remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion,” - U.S. -, 102 S.Ct. 3245, 73 L.Ed.2d 973 (1982), this case is now remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the opinion of the Supreme Court.
REMANDED.