Legal Opinion

United States v. Con-ui

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania

Decided May 10, 2017No. 3:13-CR-123Published

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM

A. Richard Caputo, United States District Judge

Presently before me is the government’s Motion in Limine to Preclude Comparative Proportionality Evidence (Doc. 918). For the reasons that follow, the motion will be granted.

I. Analysis

The government asks me to preclude Defendant from introducing at the penalty phase “comparative proportionality evidence,” that is, information on other capital prosecutions, defendants, and victims, and, in particular, similarly-situated capital cases in which a sentence of death was not pursued or imposed. Comparative proportionality evidence is aimed…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Gregg v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Lockett v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. Eddings v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  4. Penry v. LynaughSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  5. Pulley v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1984

15 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