Taylor v. State
Supreme Court of Delaware
1Concurrence
HARTNETT, Justice (Retired)
concurring.
I disagree that it was proper for the jury to have found by less than a unanimous vote that the aggravating circumstances outweighed the mitigating circumstances. See Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. *1059584, 122 S.Ct. 2428, 158 L.Ed.2d 556 (2002); Article I § 4 and Article IV § 19 of the Delaware Constitution. However, I recognize that this Court’s ruling in Brice v. State, 815 A.2d 814 (Del.2003), is binding until set aside, and I therefore concur in the result herein.
Motion for Reargument.
Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule, Appellant Milton Taylor (“Taylor”)…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Ring v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Taylor v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1996
- Taylor v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 2003
- Giustra v. UNUM Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2003