Legal Opinion

United States v. Minerd

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Decided November 19, 2001No. CR. 99-215PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

COHILL, Senior District Judge.

Defendant Joseph P. Minerd is charged with maliciously damaging and destroying, by means of fire and an explosive, a building which was used in interstate commerce and in an activity affecting interstate commerce, which conduct resulted in the deaths of Deana Mitts and Kayla Mitts, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 844(i). The government has served notice that it intends to seek the death penalty if the defendant is convicted, under the Federal Death Penalty Act (“FDPA”), 18 U.S.C. § 3591 et seq.

The defendant has filed the following pretrial motions challenging…

2Cases cited57 opinions

  1. Gregg v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Furman v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Lockett v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  4. Harmelin v. MichiganSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  5. Payne v. TennesseeSupreme Court of the United States · 1991

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. United States v. Donald FellCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2004
  2. United States v. SampsonDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2004
  3. Smith v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2009
  4. Pursell v. HornDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2002
  5. Caylor v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2011

16 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