No. 21-7809
Urshawn Eric Miller v. Tennessee
IFP
Tags: arbitrary-and-capricious arbitrary-capricious capital-punishment comparative-proportionality-review death-penalty due-process eighth-amendment proportionality-review sentencing-review
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw Punishment HabeasCorpus
AdministrativeLaw Punishment HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2022-09-28
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether Tennessee's comparative proportionality review satisfies the Eighth Amendment
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether Tennessee’s comparative proportionality review, the state’s chosen safeguard against arbitrary and capricious imposition of the death penalty, satisfies the requirements of the Eighth Amendment, when it compares the death sentence under review only to similar cases in which capital punishment was sought and imposed and ignores all similar cases where defendants were sentenced to less than death? i
Docket Entries
2022-10-03
Petition DENIED.
2022-06-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
2022-06-08
Brief of respondent Tennessee in opposition filed.
2022-05-04
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 8, 2022)
2022-02-24
Application (21A447) granted by Justice Kavanaugh extending the time to file until May 6, 2022.
2022-02-18
Application (21A447) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from March 7, 2022 to May 6, 2022, submitted to Justice Kavanaugh.
Attorneys
State of Tennessee
Urshawn Eric Miller