Lynch v. Arizona
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the Court
*1818 PER CURIAM.
Under Simmons v. South Carolina, 512 U.S. 154 , 114 S.Ct. 2187 , 129 L.Ed.2d 133 (1994), and its progeny, "where a capital defendant's future dangerousness is at issue, and the only sentencing alternative to death available to the jury is life imprisonment without possibility of parole," the Due Process Clause "entitles the defendant 'to inform the jury of [his] parole ineligibility, either by a jury instruction or in arguments by counsel.' " Shafer v. South Carolina, 532 U.S. 36 , 39, 121 S.Ct. 1263 , 149 L.Ed.2d 178 (2001) (quoting Ramdass v. Angelone, 530 U.S. 156 , 165, 120…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Simmons v. South CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Ramdass v. AngeloneSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Kelly v. South CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Shafer v. South CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- State v. LynchArizona Supreme Court · 2010
3Cited by45 opinions
- State of Arizona v. Joel Randu Escalante-OrozcoArizona Supreme Court · 2017
- State of Arizona v. James Clayton JohnsonArizona Supreme Court · 2019
- Abelardo Chaparro v. David C ShinnArizona Supreme Court · 2020
- Cruz v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 2023
- State of Arizona v. John Montenegro CruzArizona Supreme Court · 2021
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.