Legal Opinion

Lankford v. Idaho

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided May 20, 1991No. 88-7247PublishedCited by 199 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Stevens

We granted certiorari to decide whether the sentencing process followed in this capital case satisfied the requirements of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.1 More narrowly, the question is whether, at the time of petitioner’s sentencing hearing, he and his counsel had adequate notice that the judge might sentence him to death.

The unique circumstance that gives rise to concern about the adequacy of the notice in this case is the fact that, pursuant to court order, the prosecutor had formally advised the trial judge and petitioner that the State would not recommend the death…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
  3. Cleveland Board of Education v. LoudermillSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  4. Lockett v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  5. Polk County v. DodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1981

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

3Cited by199 opinions

  1. Schlup v. DeloSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  2. BMW of North America, Inc. v. GoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  3. Leday v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1998
  4. Hansen v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1991
  5. People v. RodriguesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994

194 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