Thursday, September 26, 2019
Supreme Court case that focuses on Criminal Law Research Paper
Supreme Court case that focuses on Criminal Law - Research Paper Example On October 31, 2001, the District Court reversed itsââ¬â¢ decision and granted him the writ of habeas corpus, after determining that his reasoning for requesting it was that his sentence of death was unconstitutional. Martin Horn, Commissioner of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections argued that the ââ¬Å"Supreme Court precedent did not require an outcome contrary to that reached by the state courts (536 U. S. ____ (2002). However, several other appellate and circuit courts found discrepancies in the way in which the case was handled and that it violated several Constitutional Amendments. One of the major points raised in attempts to repeal the death sentence was a case involving Teague v. Lane. The reason for stating Teague was to declare its purpose regarding the stateââ¬â¢s ruling on criminal convictions depending upon the constitutional standards at the time of the actual proceedings. Amendments were made to the Teague ruling stating that these protectionist goals should be applied retroactively. The Supreme Court determined that "federal courts must address the Teague question when it is properly argued by the government." The Court then proposed the matter of Caspari v. Bohlen, that Teagues "nonretroactivity principle prevents a federal court from granting habeas corpus relief to a state prisoner based on a" new rule, and thus that "if the State ... argue[s] that the defendant seeks the benefit of a new rule of constitutional law, the court must apply Teague before considering the merits of the claim." The Supreme Court then decided that it was necessary for them to reconsider Banksââ¬â¢ sentence according to the Teague case and that the case of Mills v. Maryland was more important (Justia US Law 2003). The final determination however was that it was unnecessary to rule retroactively regardless of the circumstances that might have made it an arguable point. The Supreme Court ruled that
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.