Saylor v. State
Indiana Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partSullivan, Justice
I agree with the majority's analysis and conclusion that Saylor is not entitled to *569post-conviction relief from his conviction for murder. I disagree, however, with its analysis and conclusion that the Indiana capital murder and sentencing scheme complies in all respects with the requirements of the Supreme Court's recent Ap-prendi decision.1 I believe that in most cases, our death penalty statute does not violate Apprendi. But contrary to the majority's view, I believe that in certain cases in which the jury recommends either a term of years or makes no sentencing recommendation and the judge…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Gregg v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Almendarez-Torres v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Furman v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Zant v. StephensSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.