Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Carr

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided July 25, 2014No. 90,044Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partMoritz, J.

I write separately for several reasons, initially to register my disagreement with my colleagues, who plaintively seek respect for their position that the “hard” and correct decision in this case is to overturn all of Reginald Carr s convictions and, consequently, his death sentence. 300 Kan. at 321 (Beier, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part).

Justice Beier s separate opinion boldly declares that the majority, in affirming Reginald Carr’s convictions, has opted for the easy way out by bowing to public pressure in this high profile case. While it might be satisfying to respond to…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Zafiro v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. People v. Letner and TobinCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
  3. United States v. TiptonCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1996
  4. State v. AikinsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1997
  5. State v. JonesSupreme Court of Kansas · 2002

7 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