State v. Davis
Arizona Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
McGREGOR, Vice Chief Justice,
concurring in part and dissenting in part:
¶73 I agree with much of the majority opinion. I agree that Davis received a very *392long sentence following his conviction of four counts of sexual misconduct with a minor, based upon four instances of sexual intercourse with girls under fifteen years of age. Op. ¶ 36. I agree that the United States Supreme Court has now made clear, through its decision in Ewing v. California, 538 U.S. 11, -, 123 S.Ct. 1179, 1187, 155 L.Ed.2d 108 (2003), that in deciding whether a sentence is so grossly disproportionate as to violate the…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Solem v. HelmSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Harmelin v. MichiganSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Rummel v. EstelleSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Ewing v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Hutto v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.