No. 22-7233
Justin Heath Thomas v. California
IFP
Tags: apprendi-v-new-jersey capital-punishment constitutional-requirement criminal-sentencing death-penalty due-process jury-finding jury-trial reasonable-doubt ring-v-arizona statutory-maximum
Key Terms:
DueProcess Punishment JusticiabilityDoctri
DueProcess Punishment JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2023-05-25
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether California's death penalty scheme violates the constitutional requirement that any fact, other than a prior conviction, that serves to increase the statutory maximum or minimum penalty for a crime must be found true beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. WHETHER CALIFORNIA’S DEATH PENALTY SCHEME VIOLATES THE CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENT THAT ANY FACT, OTHER THAN A PRIOR CONVICTION, THAT SERVES TO INCREASE THE STATUTORY MAXIMUM OR MINIMUM PENALTY FOR A CRIME MUST BE FOUND TRUE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT BY A JURY? i
Docket Entries
2023-05-30
Petition DENIED.
2023-05-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/25/2023.
2023-04-24
Brief of respondent California in opposition filed.
2023-04-03
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 8, 2023)
Attorneys
Justin Thomas
John Leis Staley — John L. Staley, Attorney, Petitioner
John Leis Staley — John L. Staley, Attorney, Petitioner
State of California
Michael Dodd Butera — State of CA-Dept of Justice-OAG, Respondent
Michael Dodd Butera — State of CA-Dept of Justice-OAG, Respondent