No. 18-6262
Richard Penunuri v. California
IFP
Tags: constitutional-requirement criminal-sentencing death-penalty eighth-amendment fact-finding fifth-amendment fourteenth-amendment jury-beyond-reasonable-doubt jury-finding reasonable-doubt sixth-amendment
Key Terms:
DueProcess Punishment CriminalProcedure JusticiabilityDoctri
DueProcess Punishment CriminalProcedure JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2018-12-07
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does California's death penalty scheme violate the requirement under the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments that every fact that serves to increase the statutory maximum for the crime must be found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Does California’s death penalty scheme violate the requirement under the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments that every fact that serves to increase the statutory maximum for the crime must be found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt? //1
Docket Entries
2018-12-10
Petition DENIED.
2018-11-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/7/2018.
2018-11-06
Brief of respondent California in opposition filed.
2018-10-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 8, 2018)
Attorneys
California
Ernesto Carlos Dominguez — California Attorney General's Office, Respondent
Richard Penunuri
Stephen Michael Lathrop — Law Offices of Lathrop & Villa, Petitioner