Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Chambers

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 20, 1996PublishedCited by 102 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

FLAHERTY, Chief Justice.

Appellant, Karl S. Chambers, seeks relief from his second sentence of death. In his original appeal, this court affirmed his convictions of robbery and murder of the first degree but vacated his death sentence and remanded for resentencing due to the prosecutor’s improper argument during the penalty phase of the trial. Commonwealth v. Chambers, 528 Pa. 558, 599 A.2d 630 (1991). A new jury again imposed the death penalty. This appeal, therefore, involves only claims of error in the penalty phase.

In appellant’s original penalty hearing, the prosecutor…

2Cases cited40 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Estelle v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  3. Murphy v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  4. Morgan v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  5. Simmons v. South CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994

35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by102 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. BomarSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  2. Commonwealth v. ChmielSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  3. Commonwealth v. LeskoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  4. Commonwealth v. WrightSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  5. Commonwealth v. CoxSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009

97 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API