Calhoun v. Maryland
Decision Date | 02 March 1987 |
Docket Number | No. 86-5867,86-5867 |
Citation | 480 U.S. 910,94 L.Ed.2d 528,107 S.Ct. 1339 |
Parties | James CALHOUN v. MARYLAND |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
On petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Maryland.
The petition for a writ of
certiorari is denied.
Adhering to my view that the death penalty is in all circumstances cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153, 227, 96 S.Ct. 2909, 2950, 49 L.Ed.2d 859 (1976), I would grant certiorari and vacate the death sentence in this case.
Maryland's capital sentencing statute provides that, "[i]f [the sentencing jury] finds that the mitigating circumstances do not outweigh the aggravating circumstances, the sentence shall be death." Md.Ann.Code, Art. 27, § 413(h)(2). The trial court's jury instruction in this case similarly stated: "If you find that the mitigating factors do not by a preponderance of the evidence outweigh the aggravating factors, then you mark that accordingly and proceed to Section 4 and enter a sentence of death." 306 Md. 692, 698, 511 A.2d 461, 464 (1986). Once again the Maryland Court of Appeals has reviewed the statute and jury instruction and has concluded that defendant was not assigned the burden of proof during his sentencing proceeding, even though neither the statute nor the instruction otherwise expressly addressed the placement of this burden.
Huffington v. Maryland, --- U.S. ----, ----, 106 S.Ct. 3315, 3318, 92 L.Ed.2d 745 (1986) ( ).
I adhere to my belief that the Maryland statute, as written, and as applied, unconstitutionally places the burden of proof on capital defendants at the sentencing phase of their trials. I would grant the petition for certiorari.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Storer Cable Com. v. City of Montgomery, Ala., Civ. A. No. 90-T-958-N.
... ... See Exxon Corp. v. Governor of Maryland, 437 U.S. 117, 131-133, 98 S.Ct. 2207, 2216-17, 57 L.Ed.2d 91 (1978). As to Turner Network's second argument, the Supreme Court in Exxon squarely ... ...
- Yonkers Racing Corp. v. City of Yonkers
-
Hunt v. State
...and "disobedience" was admissible); State v. Calhoun, 306 Md. 692, 725-29, 511 A.2d 461, 477-79 (1986), cert. denied, 480 U.S. 910, 107 S.Ct. 1339, 94 L.Ed.2d 528 (1987) (defendant's spraying of contents of a bottle, apparently containing a mixture of human waste, on a correctional officer ......
-
Conyers v. State
...jury instructions. As this Court stated in State v. Calhoun, 306 Md. 692, 741, 511 A.2d 461, 486 (1986), cert. denied, 480 U.S. 910, 107 S.Ct. 1339, 94 L.Ed.2d 528 (1987)(quoting Peek v. Kemp, 784 F.2d 1479, 1494 (11th "What we reject is the notion that the Constitution requires that the ju......
-
Chapter 17 - § 17.4 • PUNITIVE DAMAGES ARE LIKELY NOT RECOVERABLE AS PART OF A STATUTORY BAD FAITH CLAIM
...damages have similar purpose to treble damages and parties may not collect both), aff'd, 800 F.2d 711 (8th Cir.1986), cert. denied, 480 U.S. 910, 107 S.Ct. 1358, 94 L.Ed.2d 528 (1987); Eastern Star, Inc. v. Union Bldg. Materials Corp., 6 Haw. App. 125, 712 P.2d 1148, 1159 (1985) (awards of ......