In the two years since Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), California death appeals have routinely argued that Apprendi requires unanimous jury findings of the aggravating factors necessary to impose the death penalty. Apprendi required that, whenever a fact could lead to a sentence greater than that provided by statute (for example, in that case, that the crime was motivated by racial animus), the fact must be found by the jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

In Ring, the Supreme Court applied Apprendi to strike down the death penalty schemes in five states in which judges, rather than juries, were assigned the task of finding such aggravating factors. Ring, it will now be argued, requires application of Apprendi to the California death penalty sentencing scheme to preclude individual juror determinations of aggravating factors.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]