18 U.S.C. § 3594
Imposition of a sentence of death
Upon a recommendation under section 3593(e) that the defendant should be sentenced to death or life imprisonment without possibility of release, the court shall sentence the defendant accordingly. Otherwise, the court shall impose any lesser sentence that is authorized by law. Notwithstanding any other law, if the maximum term of imprisonment for the offense is life imprisonment, the court may impose a sentence of life imprisonment without possibility of release.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 50
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1998–2023 · leading case: State v. Colon, 864 A.2d 666 (Conn. 2004).
State v. Colon, 864 A.2d 666 (Conn. 2004). “, 380 , citing 18 U.S.C. § 3594 . 144 The court further determined that, notwithstanding this fact, “the Eighth Amendment does not require that the jurors be instructed as to the consequences of their failure to agree.”
United States v. Moussaoui, 591 F.3d 263 (4th Cir. 2010). “Moussaoui, however, contends that he was prejudiced by the denial of his motion for acquittal because under 18 U.S.C.A. § 3594 (West 2000), the jury’s determination that he was death-eligible, combined with the fact that the jury did not unanimously recommend a death sentence,…”
Jones v. United States, 527 U.S. 373 (1999). “" 18 U. S. C. § 3594 . The "[o]therwise" clause, requiring judge sentencing, becomes operative when a jury fails to make a unanimous recommendation at the close of deliberations.”
United States v. Mitchell, 502 F.3d 931 (9th Cir. 2007). “See 18 U.S.C. § 3594 (“Upon a recommendation under section 3593(e) that the defendant should be sentenced to death or life imprisonment without possibility of release, the court shall sentence the defendant accordingly.”
United States v. Wesley Ira Purkey, 428 F.3d 738 (8th Cir. 2005). “Purkey was permitted to address the district court before it imposed his sentence, he argues that the court functionally deprived him of his right to allocution, because it lacked any discretion to impose a sentence other than the one *761 that the jury already had recommended,…”
United States v. Daryl Lawrence, 735 F.3d 385 (6th Cir. 2013). “” Rule 32 does not, however, expressly require the district court to permit the defendant to address the jury before the jury decides upon a sentence.”
United States v. Karl T. Waldon, 363 F.3d 1103 (11th Cir. 2004). “Finally, Waldon argues that, because the jury did not “recommend” either death or life imprisonment, the plain language of 18 U.S.C. § 3594 prohibited the district court from sentencing him to any sentence but a “lesser sentence.”
United States v. Tsarnaev, 968 F.3d 24 (1st Cir. 2020). “at 380-81 , who must impose either a sentence of life without release or any lesser sentence permitted by law, see 18 U.S.C. § 3594 . - 21 - counts (Counts 4, 5, 9, 10, 14, and 15).”
United States v. Sampson, 335 F. Supp. 2d 166 (D. Mass. 2004). “See 18 U.S.C. § 3594 . III. THE FEDERAL DEATH PENALTY ACT The unique structure of the FDPA has been discussed at length in several published opinions.”
United States v. Quinones, 511 F.3d 289 (2d Cir. 2007). “Insofar as such an instruction correctly stated the law under the Federal Death Penalty Act, see 18 U.S.C. § 3594 , which applied to the capital racketeering charges against defendants, their pre-trial request for such an instruction might not, by itself, reasonably be construed…”
United States v. Basham, 561 F.3d 302 (4th Cir. 2009). “Basham’s death sentence was authorized by the FDPA, 18 U.S.C.A. § 3594 (West 2000). We possess jurisdiction over Basham’s appeal pursuant to 28 U.”
United States v. Billie Jerome Allen, United States of Am. v. Norris G. Holder, 247 F.3d 741 (8th Cir. 2001). “See 18 U.S.C. § 3594 (requiring that once a recommendation of death or life imprisonment is made, “the court shall sentence the defendant accordingly”).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.