U.S. Code » Title 18 » Part PART II— CRIMINAL PROCEDURE › Chapter CHAPTER 228— DEATH SENTENCE

18 U.S.C. § 3595

Review of a sentence of death

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)Appeal.—In a case in which a sentence of death is imposed, the sentence shall be subject to review by the court of appeals upon appeal by the defendant. Notice of appeal must be filed within the time specified for the filing of a notice of appeal. An appeal under this section may be consolidated with an appeal of the judgment of conviction and shall have priority over all other cases.(b)Review.—The court of appeals shall review the entire record in the case, including—(1) the evidence submitted during the trial;(2) the information submitted during the sentencing hearing;(3) the procedures employed in the sentencing hearing; and(4) the special findings returned under section 3593(d).(c)Decision and Disposition.—(1) The court of appeals shall address all substantive and procedural issues raised on the appeal of a sentence of death, and shall consider whether the sentence of death was imposed under the influence of passion, prejudice, or any other arbitrary factor and whether the evidence supports the special finding of the existence of an aggravating factor required to be considered under section 3592.(2) Whenever the court of appeals finds that—(A) the sentence of death was imposed under the influence of passion, prejudice, or any other arbitrary factor;(B) the admissible evidence and information adduced does not support the special finding of the existence of the required aggravating factor; or(C) the proceedings involved any other legal error requiring reversal of the sentence that was properly preserved for appeal under the rules of criminal procedure,the court shall remand the case for reconsideration under section 3593 or imposition of a sentence other than death. The court of appeals shall not reverse or vacate a sentence of death on account of any error which can be harmless, including any erroneous special finding of an aggravating factor, where the Government establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that the error was harmless.(3) The court of appeals shall state in writing the reasons for its disposition of an appeal of a sentence of death under this section.(Added Pub. L. 103–322, title VI, § 60002(a), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1967.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 102 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1989–2025 · leading case: United States v. David Runyon, 707 F.3d 475 (4th Cir. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. David Runyon, 707 F.3d 475 (4th Cir. 2013). · cites it 8× “18 U.S.C. § 3595 (c)(1). UNITED STATES v.”
United States v. Gabrion, 648 F.3d 307 (6th Cir. 2011). · cites it 12× “This case is a direct appeal pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3595 in a federal death penalty murder case tried in federal court in Grand Rapids, Michigan, for a murder committed in the Manistee National Forest.”
United States v. Basham, 561 F.3d 302 (4th Cir. 2009). · cites it 4× “§ 3592 (a)(8) (West 2000), from the special verdict form; and (6) his death sentence was rendered under “the influence of passion, prejudice, or any other arbitrary factor” in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 3595 (c)(2)(A) (West 2000).”
United States v. Daryl Lawrence, 735 F.3d 385 (6th Cir. 2013). · cites it 5× “18 U.S.C. § 3595 (c)(2)(C); United States v.”
United States v. Fell, 531 F.3d 197 (2d Cir. 2008). · cites it 5× “18 U.S.C. § 3595 . 6 Most of our discussion *209 considers the district court’s exclusion of three jurors, its exclusion of the draft plea agreement, the admission of evidence of a religious nature, the government’s compliance with the court’s instruction regarding mental health…”
United States v. Whitten, 610 F.3d 168 (2d Cir. 2010). · cites it 4× “” 18 U.S.C. § 3595 (c)(2)(A). Wilson argues that his sentence was an arbitrary outcome resulting from unduly prejudicial victim impact testimony.”
United States v. Aquart, 912 F.3d 1 (2d Cir. 2018). · cites it 3× “§ 3595 (c)(2), which states as follows: Whenever the court of appeals finds that- (A) the sentence of death was imposed under the influence of passion, prejudice, or any other arbitrary factor; (B) the admissible evidence and information adduced does not support the special…”
United States v. Billie Jerome Allen, United States of Am. v. Norris G. Holder, 247 F.3d 741 (8th Cir. 2001). · cites it 3× “Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3595 (c)(1), we have addressed all of the substantive and procedural issues raised by Billie Jerome Allen’s appeal from the sentence of death.”
United States v. Rejon Taylor, 814 F.3d 340 (6th Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “” 18 U.S.C. § 3595 (c). A careful review of the record, measured against the Constitution’s guarantees and the FDPA’s directives, mandates that Taylor’s death sentence be vacated.”
United States v. Fields, 483 F.3d 313 (5th Cir. 2007). · cites it 2× “He assei'ts, for the first time on appeal, that the district court violated his due process and Eighth Amendment rights by allowing the government to use this metaphor. Additionally, he argues that the government’s use of the metaphor resulted in a sentence based in part on…”
United States v. Wesley Ira Purkey, 428 F.3d 738 (8th Cir. 2005). · cites it 3× “See 18 U.S.C. § 3595 (c)(2); Jones v. United States, 527 U.”
United States v. Jorge Torrez, 869 F.3d 291 (4th Cir. 2017). · cites it 4× “” 18 U.S.C. § 3595 (c)(1). For any error in the sentencing proceeding, the 21 government must “establish[] beyond a reasonable doubt that the error was harmless.”
Show all 102 citing cases →
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.