Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Idaho opinions name it 1 courts 1998–2010 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Idaho courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Lovelacegreen2 sentences2010“This Court must first resolve whether the error is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt where the statutory aggravating factors, which render a defendant death eligible, were neither included in the instructions to the jury nor proven beyond a reasonable doubt.” State v. Lovelace (Lovelace II), 140 Idaho 73, 79 , 90 P.3d 298, 304 (2004). 2010“This Court must first resolve whether the error is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt where the statutory aggravating factors, which render a defendant death eligible, were neither included in the instructions to the jury nor proven beyond a reasonable doubt.” State v. Lovelace (Lovelace II), 140 Idaho 73, 79 , 90 P.3d 298, 304 (2004). | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Idaho. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ring v. Arizona
green
2 sentences2005Hoffinan based his Third Petition on the case of Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 , 122 S.Ct. 2428 , 153 L.Ed.2d 556 (2002), which held that the Sixth Amendment’s guarantee of a jury trial requires that a jury, not a judge, must find the statutory aggravating factors necessary for imposition of the death penalty. 2005Hoffinan based his Third Petition on the case of Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 , 122 S.Ct. 2428 , 153 L.Ed.2d 556 (2002), which held that the Sixth Amendment’s guarantee of a jury trial requires that a jury, not a judge, must find the statutory aggravating factors necessary for imposition of the death penalty. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Sattazahn v. Pennsylvania
green
1 sentence2003Id. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Arizona v. Rumsey
green
2 sentences1998Id. at 206-07 , 104 S.Ct. 2305 . 1998Id. at 206-07 , 104 S.Ct. 2305 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.