Knowledge

Roper v. Simmons

Source 📝

913: 34: 555:, having previously told friends that he "wanted to kill someone" and that he "believed he could get away with it because he was a minor". Simmons convinced two of his friends to join him: 15-year-old Charles Benjamin and 16-year-old John Tessmer. Simmons met with Benjamin and Tessmer at 2 a.m. to carry out their plan, but Tessmer decided to leave before any crimes were committed. Simmons and Benjamin later broke into the home of Shirley Crook, a 46-year-old neighbor, where they 511:, upheld the possibility of capital punishment for offenders who were 16 or 17 years old when they committed the capital offense. The court found there was no national consensus that the execution of older adolescents was cruel and unusual under "evolving standards of decency" because the sentence was still permitted by a majority of death penalty jurisdictions. Justice 976:, where they were arrested, to Virginia, was the difference in how the two states deal with the death penalty. While the death penalty was allowed in Maryland, it was only applied to persons who were adults at the time of their crimes, whereas Virginia had also allowed the death penalty for offenders who had been juveniles when their crimes were committed. 498:, brought its own judgment "to bear on the question of the acceptability of the death penalty under the Eighth Amendment" and decided that diminished personal capacity makes the death penalty an excessive punishment for the intellectually disabled because the public purposes of retribution and deterrence are not served by executing the mentally impaired. 692:, the objective indicia of consensus in this case—the rejection of the juvenile death penalty in the majority of States; the infrequency of its use even where it remains on the books; and the consistency in the trend toward abolition of the practice—provide sufficient evidence that today our society views juveniles, in the words 866:, the chief scientific consultant for the APA's amicus brief says neuroscience evidence is "helpful and appropriate in providing concurrent validation of the behavioral science" asserting that "there are structural and functional changes in the brain during this time period map onto what we know about behavioral changes". 700:
The Court's "independent judgement" concluding that the death penalty was an unconstitutionally disproportionate punishment for juveniles as a class relied on psychological and sociological studies to establish the diminished culpability of juveniles. Justice Kennedy makes three points explaining why
1065:
Simmons, Benjamin, and Tessmer met on September 9, 1993 near the trailer of an older neighbor, a 29-year-old ex-convict named Brian Moomey, to discuss their plan. Simmons and his friends frequently visited Moomey's trailer in the months preceding the murder, where Moomey would let them drink alcohol
612:
Simmons moved for the trial court to set aside the conviction and sentence, citing, in part, ineffective assistance of counsel. His age, and thus impulsiveness, along with a troubled background, were brought up as issues that Simmons claimed should have been raised at the sentencing phase. The trial
737:
If trained psychiatrists with the advantage of clinical testing and observation refrain, despite diagnostic expertise, from assessing any juvenile under 18 as having antisocial personality disorder, we conclude that States should refrain from asking jurors to issue a far graver condemnation that a
709:
Juveniles are more vulnerable to negative influences and outside pressures, including peer pressure. Kennedy says the circumstances of youth contribute to a juvenile's vulnerability. He cites Steinberg & Scott for the point that "legal minors lack the freedom that adults have to extricate them
591:
and agreed to answer questions. Simmons initially denied involvement but later confessed to the murder and agreed to perform a videotaped reenactment at the crime scene. Simmons further told detectives that he recognized Crook as someone he had been in a minor traffic accident with several months
831:
agreed with the Court's general methodology but disputed the majority's conclusions. She said the objective evidence for a national consensus was "weaker than in most prior cases in which the Court has struck down a particular punishment". Furthermore, she was skeptical of the Court's conclusion
785:
Justice Scalia's primary objection was that "the real driving force" of the majority's analysis was "the Court's own judgment" about deterrence and retribution. Scalia said sentencing decisions made by juries were based on the circumstances of each case. He critcized the majority's finding of a
971:
in October 2002. At the time of the attacks, Malvo was 17 years old. In light of this Supreme Court decision, the prosecutors in Prince William County decided not to pursue the charges against Malvo. At the outset of the Beltway sniper prosecutions, the primary reason for extraditing the two
1075:
Benjamin stated in a 2002 interview that he waited in the car while Simmons threw Crook off of the bridge and that he didn't know what happened to Crook until the following morning. However, prosecutors stated that it would have taken both Simmons and Benjamin to carry Crook's body to the
952:
overturned the death sentences of 72 others who had already been convicted for crimes they committed while younger than age 18. The greatest effects were in Texas, where 29 juvenile offenders were awaiting execution, and in Alabama, where 13 on death row had been sentenced as juveniles.
845:
Empirical developmental studies about adolescent behavior featured prominently during oral arguments and in the Court's reasoning. The majority's conclusion about the diminished culpability of 16 and 17 year olds was mostly based on psychological and sociological studies cited by the
582:
Simmons was heard "bragging about the murder" later that day and told his friends that he had killed a woman. The day after the murder, police arrested Simmons and Benjamin at their high school after receiving a tip that they were involved in the murder. At the police station in
888:
majority's finding of a national consensus was weak (twenty states still allowed executions for crimes committed by older adolescents), the Court was persuaded that foreign jurisdictions could provide "respected and significant confirmation" for their proportionality analysis.
530:
plurality had failed “to bring its independent judgment to bear on the proportionality of the death penalty for a particular class of...offenders". Finding that "penological justifications for the death penalty apply to with lesser force than to adults", The Court reversed
630:
concluded that "a national consensus has developed against the execution of juvenile offenders" and held that such punishment now violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. They sentenced Simmons to life imprisonment without parole.
742:
Finally, Justice Kennedy supports the Court's decision by looking to trends in other countries. He says the United States "stands alone in a world that has turned its face against the juvenile death penalty", but admits this fact is "not controlling":
705:
Juveniles' "lack of maturity and underdeveloped sense of responsibility" effects their decision making. Kennedy quotes from a study about adolescent behavior stating "adolescents are overrepresented statistically in virtually every category of reckless
595:
Simmons was charged with first-degree murder, burglary, kidnapping, and stealing. He was tried as an adult. At trial, Tessmer testified that Simmons planned the murder in advance. The jury found Simmons guilty of Crook's murder and recommended the
729:
plurality opinion to explain that imposing the death penalty would not serve a deterrent purpose for a class of prisoners who were unlikely to engage in "the kind of cost benefit analysis that attaches any weight to the possibility of execution".
448:
The Court has limited the death penalty to offenders who commit the "most serious crimes" and who are "the most deserving of execution" based on their culpability and blameworthiness. The Supreme Court has restricted death sentences by crime (see
2964: 755:. Justice Kennedy says the United Kingdom's abolition of the juvenile death penalty (and subsequent abolition of the death penalty in general) "bears particular relevance here in light of the historic ties between our countries". 811:
in arguing that the role of the judiciary in the constitutional scheme is to interpret the law as formulated in democratically selected legislatures. He argued that it is for the legislature, acting in the manner prescribed in
801:
He accused the majority of invoking foreign law selectively. He said the majority had taken it upon themselves to "ratify treaties on behalf of the United States" that were expressly rejected by the political branches.
441:(1910) the Supreme Court has elaborated that the Eighth Amendment protects the dignity of all persons, "even those convicted of heinous crimes". Excessive and disproportionate punishments are prohibited as 717:
The Court concludes that the death penalty is excessive when imposed on juveniles because retribution against a class of offenders with dimished culpability is an inappropriate legislative purpose:
721:
Retribution is not proportional if the law's most severe penalty is imposed on one whose culpability or blameworthiness is diminished, to a substantial degree, by reason of youth and immaturity.
2979: 236:
The Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments forbid imposition of the death penalty on offenders who were under the age of 18 when their crimes were committed. Supreme Court of Missouri affirmed, and
2901: 1557:
1160 (2004). (Donald P. Roper, the Superintendent of the correctional facility where Simmons was held, was a party to the action because it was brought as a petition for a writ of
654:
Under the "evolving standards of decency" test, the Court held that it was cruel and unusual punishment to execute a person who was under the age of 18 when the crime was committed.
797:
Though the views of our own citizens are essentially irrelevant to the Court's decision today, the views of other countries and the so-called international community take center stage
2999: 832:
about diminished culpability for those who committed crimes before they turned 18 because the "mitigating characteristics associated with youth not justify an absolute age limit".
763:
The dissents questioned the majority's finding that a "national consensus" had formed, its methodology and the propriety of basing constitutional interpretation on foreign laws.
1085:
Shirley Crook was reported as a missing person earlier that afternoon by her husband Steven Crook, who was away from home on an overnight trip on the night of the murder.
658: 2444: 873:
submitting scientific evidence has been debated for many years. Justices have themselves acknowledged their limited qualifications to evaluate scientific evidence.
862:
showed that scientific evidence "can influence the attribution of responsibility for criminal acts" when the evidence is consistent with common sense observations.
519:
judgment, was critical of the plurality's refusal "to judge whether the nexus between the punishment imposed and the defendant's blameworthiness is proportional."
1206: 616:
The case worked its way up the court system, with the courts continuing to uphold the death sentence. However, in light of a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, in
1667:& Scott, Elizabeth S. (2003), "Less Guilty by Reason of Adolescence: Developmental Immaturity, Diminished Responsibility, and the Juvenile Death Penalty", 375: 2066: 1550: 1505: 1483: 1172: 1147: 1118: 1046: 219: 188: 155: 85: 2969: 896:
Justice Scalia did not take the sentencing practices of foreign countries into consideration: "it is American conceptions of decency that are dispositive."
752: 2202: 1924: 816:
of the Constitution to offer amendments to the Constitution in light of the evolving standard of decency, not for the Court to make what he considered
371: 445:
by the Court's precedent. The Court has applied an "evolving standards of decency" test to decide which punishments are unconstitutionally excessive.
725:
The Court notes the "absence of evidence of deterrent effect". The majority reasons that adolescents are not likely to be deterred, quoting from the
1094:
Tessmer was charged with criminal conspiracy for his role in the murder, but the charges were dropped in exchange for his testimony against Simmons.
1000:
arguing that life without parole sentences for minors were unconstitutional based on developmental science about adolescent risk-taking behavior.
813: 747:
The opinion of the world community, while not controlling outcome, does provide respected and significant confirmation for our own conclusions.
892:
Justices have mixed views about the relevance of international norms to "evolving standards of decency" analysis. Writing for the majority in
1003:
The State of Alabama sought review in the U.S. Supreme Court, raising a single issue, "Whether this Court should reconsider its decision in
786:"national consensus" when more than half the states that allowed capital punishments also allowed the sentence to be imposed on juveniles. 1975: 1359: 733:
The majority rejects the view taken by the dissent that youth was a mitigating factor to be taken into consideration during sentencing:
2974: 789:
In addition, Justice Scalia also objected in general to the Court's willingness to take guidance from foreign law in interpreting the
2994: 1810: 661:, but only six states had executed prisoners since 1989 for crimes committed as juveniles. Only three states had done so since 1994: 884:
reignited an ongoing academic debate about how American courts should decide whether a punishment is cruel and unusual. Because the
2193: 326: 2989: 2984: 348: 337: 601: 2348: 1325: 1277: 858:
says "it is not clear that the neuroscience evidence carries any special weight in the majority's reasoning". She says
847: 410: 358: 38: 1423: 657:
The Court found a "national consensus" based on state laws and jury sentencing behavior. At the time of the decision,
2156: 2130: 805:
Scalia also attacked the majority opinion as being fundamentally antidemocratic. His dissent cited a passage from
571:, where Simmons and Benjamin unloaded Crook from the van. They then covered her head with a towel, wrapped her in 427:, in which the court had upheld execution of offenders at or above age 16, and overturned statutes in 25 states. 2164: 2122: 854:
briefs included neuroscience evidence and neuroimaging research but these were not directly cited by the Court.
2828: 2148: 1530: 207: 579:
while she was still alive and conscious. Crook's body was discovered that afternoon by a group of fishermen.
1471: 751:
The Court takes note of the fact that only Somalia and the United States had not ratified Article 37 of the
176: 2186: 2140: 442: 646:
and held that the Eighth Amendment does not allow death sentences for juvenile offenders younger than 18.
2917: 2796: 2049: 488:
that decision was justified by retributive and deterrent purposes of state death penalty statutes. When
2016: 790: 2004: 634:
The State of Missouri appealed the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case.
2780: 2452: 1534: 1452: 1405: 627: 139: 2095: 1681: 2933: 2880: 696:
used respecting the mentally retarded, as "categorically less culpable than the average criminal".
2909: 2305: 2179: 1448: 1401: 1331: 1283: 912: 623: 135: 124: 108: 2086: 2892: 2756: 2356: 2241: 2233: 1949: 1676: 1398: 956:
The decision overturned the laws of 25 states that allowed 16 and 17 year olds to be executed.
828: 512: 437: 273: 1210:, 96 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 947–994 (2006) (internal quotation marks omitted). 57:
Donald P. Roper, Superintendent, Potosi Correctional Center, Petitioner v. Christopher Simmons
2863: 2660: 2604: 2484: 2070: 1829: 1554: 1509: 1487: 1176: 1151: 1122: 807: 564: 223: 192: 159: 77: 1240: 1013:(i.e., declined to take the case for review) on June 19, 2006, without a published dissent. 2620: 2516: 2508: 2492: 2476: 2321: 2265: 1894: 1167: 1142: 1023: 713:
Juveniles have more capacity to reform because their identities are less fixed than adults.
507: 463: 423: 390: 238: 2171: 1772: 8: 2721: 2676: 2412: 2313: 2273: 2020: 2008: 968: 901: 301: 2077: 2042:
Disposing of Children: The Eighth Amendment and Juvenile Life without Parole after Roper
2788: 2713: 2668: 2540: 2532: 2460: 2436: 2404: 2372: 2281: 2104: 1875: 1664: 1633: 1512: 1500: 1429: 1179: 1154: 1125: 863: 618: 597: 475: 469: 418: 66: 2804: 2772: 2697: 2588: 2556: 2524: 2420: 2364: 2340: 2297: 2289: 2249: 2041: 1792: 1753: 1694: 1039: 1031: 996: 775: 572: 457: 414: 406: 265: 257: 2925: 2820: 2705: 2644: 2636: 2500: 2468: 2428: 2388: 2380: 1906: 1867: 1784: 1745: 1686: 1645: 990: 588: 584: 494: 484: 451: 2965:
United States Supreme Court decisions that overrule a prior Supreme Court decision
482:
When the Court upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty in the 1977 case
80: 2764: 2628: 2596: 2580: 2572: 2548: 2396: 1925:"Case Summaries of Juvenile Offenders Who Were on Death Row in the United States" 1690: 855: 779: 681: 297: 285: 1788: 1207:
Roper v. Simmons: The Collision of National Consensus and Proportionality Review
2872: 2812: 2748: 2729: 2652: 2017:
Malvo Gets Two More Life Terms, Teen Sniper Enters Plea In Spotsylvania Attacks
964: 897: 771: 673:. Furthermore, five of the states that allowed the juvenile death penalty when 568: 309: 277: 2958: 2257: 1852: 1559: 576: 164: 1736:
Dresser, Rebecca (2008). "Neuroscience's Uncertain Threat to Criminal Law".
2612: 2050:
Death Penalty Information Center – Juvenile Offenders Who Were On Death Row
1796: 1757: 1698: 421:
for crimes committed while under the age of 18. The 5–4 decision overruled
289: 2113: 2031:
Proportionality and Punishment: Imposing Life without Parole on Juveniles
600:, which the trial court imposed. For his role, Benjamin was sentenced to 501:
In 1988 a plurality barred execution of offenders under the age of 16 in
2030: 1895:"Abolishing the Death Penalty Worldwide: The Impact of a "New Dynamic"" 1879: 1749: 1009: 560: 150: 96: 1976:"ALABAMA v. ADAMS, 547 U.S. 1218 | U.S., Judgment, Law, casemine.com" 626:, Simmons filed a new petition for state post-conviction relief. The 556: 92: 1871: 967:
became no longer eligible for the death penalty for his role in the
547:
in 1993, 17-year-old Christopher Simmons concocted a plan to commit
2902:
Browning-Ferris Industries of Vermont, Inc. v. Kelco Disposal, Inc.
1910: 1773:"Supreme Court Cites Science in Limiting Punishments for Juveniles" 1649: 1634:"Juvenile Justice Policy and Practice: A Developmental Perspective" 1475: 973: 960: 670: 662: 548: 544: 180: 144: 1632:
Monahan, Kathryn; Steinberg, Laurence; Piquero, Alex R. (2015).
959:
The impact of this ruling was immediately felt in the State of
552: 204: 132: 33: 2980:
Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause and death penalty case law
526:
decision, Justice Kennedy, writing for the majority, said the
123:
Defendant convicted, motion for postconviction relief denied,
1066:
and take drugs. Moomey would later be a key witness at trial.
666: 2201: 1468: 592:
earlier and that he believed Crook recognized him as well.
173: 1241:
Aggravating Youth: Roper v Simmons and Age Discrimination
3000:
United States Supreme Court cases of the Rehnquist Court
1631: 1047:
Capital punishment for juveniles in the United States
659:
20 states had the juvenile death penalty on the books
1811:"Courts need help when it comes to science and tech" 753:
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child
99:
2200; 73 U.S.L.W. 4153; 18 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 131
1604:"The Debate over Foreign Law in Roper v. Simmons". 1381: 1379: 575:, and threw her off of the trestle bridge into the 1307: 1305: 16:2005 U.S. Supreme Court case on capital punishment 1007:, 543 U.S. 551 (2005)". The Supreme Court denied 613:court rejected the motion, and Simmons appealed. 383:This case overturned a previous ruling or rulings 162:953 (1997). Denial of petition for a writ of 2956: 2215: 1376: 2005:5-4 Supreme Court Abolishes Juvenile Executions 1770: 1302: 1663: 1299:, at 556–557; at 618 (Scalia, J., dissenting). 2187: 563:her in her van. Simmons drove Crook's van to 329:, joined by Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer 2852: 677:was decided in 1989 had since abolished it. 622:, that overturned the death penalty for the 492:was decided in 2002 the Court, quoting from 1356: 738:juvenile offender merits the death penalty. 125:Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Missouri 2194: 2180: 2157:Reply Brief of Petitioner, Donald P. Roper 1771:Miller, Greg; Steinberg, Laurence (2012). 1627: 1625: 1623: 1621: 1619: 1599: 1597: 1595: 1593: 1591: 1589: 1587: 1585: 1583: 1581: 1278:Murderer: How teen burglars became killers 979: 701:juveniles are less culpable than adults: 607: 1892: 1860:The American Journal of International Law 1830:"Foreign Law and the Denominator Problem" 1680: 2970:United States children's rights case law 2165:Brief of Respondent, Christopher Simmons 2034:, 33 Wake Forest L. Rev. 681 (1998). 911: 2123:Supreme Court (slip opinion) (archived) 2015:Boorstein, Michelle (October 27, 2004) 1735: 1616: 1578: 1326:Teens Killed Woman, Got $ 6, Police Say 1244:, 2005 Sup. Ct. Rev. 51–102 (2005). 1160: 649: 195:924 (2001). Petition for a writ of 2957: 2038: 1853:"International Law as Part of Our Law" 1493: 840: 2851: 2349:Louisiana ex rel. Francis v. Resweber 2214: 2175: 2027: 1827: 1821: 1237: 1203: 920:minimum ages for executions by state 21:2005 United States Supreme Court case 2149:Brief of Petitioner, Donald P. Roper 1893:Hood, Roger; Hoyle, Carolyn (2009). 1221: 1219: 1217: 435:In a line of cases reaching back to 1850: 1424:Too Immature for the Death Penalty? 823: 413:in which the Court held that it is 13: 1997: 1128: (2005) (hereinafter cited as 848:American Psychological Association 411:Supreme Court of the United States 39:Supreme Court of the United States 14: 3011: 2975:United States Supreme Court cases 2141:Petition for a Writ of Certiorari 2073:551 (2005) is available from: 2055: 2045:, 47 B.C.L. Rev. 1083 (2006). 1214: 988:decision the APA filed briefs in 766: 2995:Capital punishment for juveniles 1929:Death Penalty Information Center 1815:American Bar Association Journal 948:The Supreme Court's decision in 850:in an amicus brief. Some of the 637: 32: 1968: 1942: 1917: 1886: 1844: 1803: 1764: 1729: 1717: 1705: 1656: 1566: 1540: 1518: 1458: 1436: 1415: 1388: 1367: 1350: 1338: 1317: 1290: 1269: 1260: 1088: 1079: 1069: 559:her mouth and eyes shut before 538: 2990:2005 in United States case law 2985:Capital punishment in Missouri 2829:City of Grants Pass v. Johnson 2203:United States Eighth Amendment 2003:Lane, Charles (March 2, 2005) 1526:State ex rel. Simmons v. Roper 1248: 1231: 1197: 1185: 1135: 1108: 1059: 876: 201:State ex rel. Simmons v. Roper 1: 1360:Juvenile Death Penalty Update 1101: 710:from a criminogenic setting". 461:) and class of offender (see 430: 361:, joined by Rehnquist, Thomas 2216:Cruel and unusual punishment 1691:10.1037/0003-066X.58.12.1009 1408:1997) (hereinafter cited as 443:cruel and unusual punishment 405:, 543 U.S. 551 (2005), is a 7: 2918:United States v. Bajakajian 2132:Transcript of Oral Argument 1851:Koh, Harold Hongju (2004). 1789:10.1126/science.337.6090.25 1363:, PBS (March 4, 2005). 1016: 925: No capital punishment 758: 642:The Supreme Court reversed 567:and parked near a railroad 10: 3016: 2114:Oyez (oral argument audio) 1950:"A new challenge to Roper" 1738:The Hastings Center Report 904:considered them relevant. 774:wrote a dissent joined by 680:Writing for the majority, 2891: 2862: 2858: 2847: 2781:South Carolina v. Gathers 2740: 2687: 2453:Skipper v. South Carolina 2332: 2225: 2221: 2210: 1828:Young, Ernest A. (2005). 907: 835: 628:Supreme Court of Missouri 388: 381: 370: 365: 354: 344: 333: 322: 317: 251: 246: 235: 230: 119: 114: 104: 72: 62: 52: 45: 31: 26: 2934:Tyler v. Hennepin County 2881:United States v. Salerno 2853:Excessive bail and fines 2040: 2029: 1358: 1239: 1205: 1052: 372:U.S. Const. amends. VIII 2910:Austin v. United States 2445:Caldwell v. Mississippi 2306:Montgomery v. Louisiana 1332:St. Louis Post-Dispatch 1284:St. Louis Post-Dispatch 980:Subsequent developments 943: Minimum age of 16 937: Minimum age of 17 931: Minimum age of 18 776:Chief Justice Rehnquist 624:intellectually disabled 608:Lower court proceedings 46:Argued October 13, 2004 2893:Excessive Fines Clause 2757:Robinson v. California 2373:California v. Anderson 2357:McGautha v. California 2242:Robinson v. California 2234:Weems v. United States 1531:112 S.W.3d 397 1449:944 S.W.2d 165 969:Beltway sniper attacks 945: 799: 749: 740: 723: 698: 505:. The following year 438:Weems v. United States 2864:Excessive Bail Clause 2605:Panetti v. Quarterman 2485:Maynard v. Cartwright 1669:American Psychologist 1335:, September 11, 1993. 915: 808:The Federalist Papers 795: 745: 735: 719: 686: 587:, Simmons waived his 565:Castlewood State Park 91:125 S. Ct. 1183; 161 48:Decided March 1, 2005 2621:Kennedy v. Louisiana 2517:Whitmore v. Arkansas 2509:Stanford v. Kentucky 2493:Thompson v. Oklahoma 2477:Lowenfield v. Phelps 2322:Jones v. Mississippi 2266:Harmelin v. Michigan 1238:Elizabeth F. Emens, 1168:Stanford v. Kentucky 1143:Thompson v. Oklahoma 1024:Kennedy v. Louisiana 650:Opinion of the Court 515:, concurring in the 508:Stanford v. Kentucky 503:Thompson v. Oklahoma 464:Thompson v. Oklahoma 424:Stanford v. Kentucky 391:Stanford v. Kentucky 340:, joined by Ginsburg 239:Stanford v. Kentucky 2797:Helling v. McKinney 2722:Hudson v. McMillian 2688:Corporal punishment 2677:Bucklew v. Precythe 2413:Spaziano v. Florida 2314:Virginia v. LeBlanc 2274:Ewing v. California 2160:, September 7, 2004 2039:Hillary J. Massey, 2021:The Washington Post 2009:The Washington Post 1665:Steinberg, Laurence 1612:(1): 103–108. 2005. 1465:Simmons v. Bowersox 1433:, October 17, 2004. 902:Ruth Bader Ginsburg 841:Scientific evidence 602:life without parole 513:Sandra Day O'Connor 302:Ruth Bader Ginsburg 274:Sandra Day O'Connor 170:Simmons v. Bowersox 2789:Payne v. Tennessee 2714:Ingraham v. Wright 2669:Madison v. Alabama 2541:Atkins v. Virginia 2533:Herrera v. Collins 2461:Ford v. Wainwright 2437:Glass v. Louisiana 2405:Godfrey v. Georgia 2282:Lockyer v. Andrade 2144:, October 24, 2003 2136:, October 13, 2004 2134:, Roper v. Simmons 1834:Harvard Law Review 1750:10.1353/hcr.0.0076 1675:(12): 1009–1018 , 1606:Harvard Law Review 1501:Atkins v. Virginia 1357:Tim O'Brien,  946: 864:Laurence Steinberg 619:Atkins v. Virginia 476:Atkins v. Virginia 470:Ford v. Wainwright 419:capital punishment 262:Associate Justices 2952: 2951: 2948: 2947: 2944: 2943: 2843: 2842: 2839: 2838: 2805:Farmer v. Brennan 2773:Estelle v. Gamble 2698:Jackson v. Bishop 2589:Hill v. McDonough 2557:Tennard v. Dretke 2525:Walton v. Arizona 2421:Enmund v. Florida 2365:Furman v. Georgia 2341:Wilkerson v. Utah 2298:Miller v. Alabama 2290:Graham v. Florida 2250:Rummel v. Estelle 1899:Crime and Justice 1638:Crime and Science 1385:Br. of Simmons 2. 1040:Miller v. Alabama 1032:Graham v. Florida 997:Miller v. Alabama 589:right to attorney 458:Enmund v. Florida 407:landmark decision 398: 397: 258:William Rehnquist 3007: 2926:Timbs v. Indiana 2860: 2859: 2849: 2848: 2821:Kahler v. Kansas 2706:Gates v. Collier 2645:Hurst v. Florida 2637:Glossip v. Gross 2565:Roper v. Simmons 2501:Penry v. Lynaugh 2469:Tison v. Arizona 2429:Pulley v. Harris 2389:Coker v. Georgia 2381:Gregg v. Georgia 2223: 2222: 2212: 2211: 2196: 2189: 2182: 2173: 2172: 2152:, April 20, 2004 2127: 2121: 2118: 2112: 2109: 2103: 2100: 2094: 2091: 2085: 2082: 2076: 2063:Roper v. Simmons 2046: 2044: 2035: 2033: 2028:Wayne A. Logan, 1991: 1990: 1988: 1986: 1972: 1966: 1965: 1963: 1961: 1956:. April 20, 2006 1946: 1940: 1939: 1937: 1935: 1921: 1915: 1914: 1890: 1884: 1883: 1857: 1848: 1842: 1841: 1825: 1819: 1818: 1807: 1801: 1800: 1768: 1762: 1761: 1733: 1727: 1721: 1715: 1709: 1703: 1701: 1684: 1660: 1654: 1653: 1629: 1614: 1613: 1601: 1576: 1570: 1564: 1547:Roper v. Simmons 1544: 1538: 1528: 1522: 1516: 1497: 1491: 1462: 1456: 1446: 1444:State v. Simmons 1440: 1434: 1432: 1419: 1413: 1395:State v. Simmons 1392: 1386: 1383: 1374: 1371: 1365: 1364: 1362: 1354: 1348: 1346: 1342: 1336: 1334: 1321: 1315: 1309: 1300: 1294: 1288: 1286: 1273: 1267: 1264: 1258: 1256: 1252: 1246: 1245: 1243: 1235: 1229: 1223: 1212: 1211: 1209: 1201: 1195: 1189: 1183: 1164: 1158: 1139: 1133: 1115:Roper v. Simmons 1112: 1095: 1092: 1086: 1083: 1077: 1073: 1067: 1063: 1005:Roper v. Simmons 991:Graham v Florida 950:Roper v. Simmons 942: 936: 930: 924: 869:The practice of 829:Justice O'Connor 824:O'Connor dissent 585:Fenton, Missouri 543:In the state of 495:Coker v. Georgia 485:Gregg v. Georgia 452:Coker v. Georgia 415:unconstitutional 402:Roper v. Simmons 247:Court membership 226:1160 (2004). 129:State v. Simmons 36: 35: 27:Roper v. Simmons 24: 23: 3015: 3014: 3010: 3009: 3008: 3006: 3005: 3004: 2955: 2954: 2953: 2940: 2887: 2854: 2835: 2765:Powell v. Texas 2736: 2709:(5th Cir. 1974) 2701:(8th Cir. 1968) 2689: 2683: 2629:Hall v. Florida 2597:Kansas v. Marsh 2581:Oregon v. Guzek 2576:(5th Cir. 2005) 2573:Bigby v. Dretke 2549:Ring v. Arizona 2397:Lockett v. Ohio 2328: 2217: 2206: 2200: 2168:, July 19, 2004 2125: 2119: 2116: 2110: 2107: 2101: 2098: 2092: 2089: 2083: 2080: 2074: 2058: 2000: 1998:Further reading 1995: 1994: 1984: 1982: 1974: 1973: 1969: 1959: 1957: 1948: 1947: 1943: 1933: 1931: 1923: 1922: 1918: 1891: 1887: 1872:10.2307/3139255 1855: 1849: 1845: 1826: 1822: 1809: 1808: 1804: 1769: 1765: 1734: 1730: 1722: 1718: 1710: 1706: 1682:10.1.1.497.7026 1661: 1657: 1630: 1617: 1603: 1602: 1579: 1571: 1567: 1545: 1541: 1524: 1523: 1519: 1498: 1494: 1490:924 (2001). 1463: 1459: 1442: 1441: 1437: 1428: 1420: 1416: 1393: 1389: 1384: 1377: 1373:Br. of Roper 5. 1372: 1368: 1355: 1351: 1344: 1343: 1339: 1330: 1322: 1318: 1310: 1303: 1295: 1291: 1287:, June 6, 2002. 1282: 1274: 1270: 1266:Br. of Roper 6. 1265: 1261: 1254: 1253: 1249: 1236: 1232: 1224: 1215: 1202: 1198: 1190: 1186: 1165: 1161: 1140: 1136: 1113: 1109: 1104: 1099: 1098: 1093: 1089: 1084: 1080: 1074: 1070: 1064: 1060: 1055: 1019: 982: 944: 940: 938: 934: 932: 928: 926: 922: 910: 879: 856:Rebecca Dresser 843: 838: 826: 769: 761: 682:Justice Kennedy 652: 640: 610: 573:electrical wire 541: 433: 384: 300: 298:Clarence Thomas 288: 286:Anthony Kennedy 276: 266:John P. Stevens 100: 47: 41: 22: 17: 12: 11: 5: 3013: 3003: 3002: 2997: 2992: 2987: 2982: 2977: 2972: 2967: 2950: 2949: 2946: 2945: 2942: 2941: 2939: 2938: 2930: 2922: 2914: 2906: 2897: 2895: 2889: 2888: 2886: 2885: 2877: 2873:Stack v. Boyle 2868: 2866: 2856: 2855: 2845: 2844: 2841: 2840: 2837: 2836: 2834: 2833: 2825: 2817: 2813:Brown v. Plata 2809: 2801: 2793: 2785: 2777: 2769: 2761: 2753: 2749:Trop v. Dulles 2744: 2742: 2738: 2737: 2735: 2734: 2730:Hope v. Pelzer 2726: 2718: 2710: 2702: 2693: 2691: 2685: 2684: 2682: 2681: 2673: 2665: 2661:Moore v. Texas 2657: 2653:Kansas v. Carr 2649: 2641: 2633: 2625: 2617: 2609: 2601: 2593: 2585: 2577: 2569: 2561: 2553: 2545: 2537: 2529: 2521: 2513: 2505: 2497: 2489: 2481: 2473: 2465: 2457: 2449: 2441: 2433: 2425: 2417: 2409: 2401: 2393: 2385: 2377: 2369: 2361: 2353: 2345: 2336: 2334: 2330: 2329: 2327: 2326: 2318: 2310: 2302: 2294: 2286: 2278: 2270: 2262: 2254: 2246: 2238: 2229: 2227: 2219: 2218: 2208: 2207: 2199: 2198: 2191: 2184: 2176: 2170: 2169: 2161: 2153: 2145: 2137: 2128: 2096:Google Scholar 2057: 2056:External links 2054: 2053: 2052: 2047: 2036: 2025: 2013: 1999: 1996: 1993: 1992: 1967: 1941: 1916: 1911:10.1086/599200 1885: 1843: 1820: 1802: 1763: 1728: 1716: 1704: 1655: 1650:10.1086/681553 1644:(1): 577–629. 1615: 1577: 1565: 1539: 1517: 1492: 1457: 1435: 1421:Paul Raeburn, 1414: 1387: 1375: 1366: 1349: 1337: 1316: 1301: 1289: 1268: 1259: 1247: 1230: 1213: 1196: 1184: 1159: 1134: 1106: 1105: 1103: 1100: 1097: 1096: 1087: 1078: 1068: 1057: 1056: 1054: 1051: 1050: 1049: 1044: 1036: 1028: 1018: 1015: 981: 978: 972:suspects from 965:Lee Boyd Malvo 939: 933: 927: 921: 909: 906: 898:Stephen Breyer 878: 875: 842: 839: 837: 834: 825: 822: 780:Justice Thomas 772:Justice Scalia 768: 767:Scalia dissent 765: 760: 757: 715: 714: 711: 707: 651: 648: 639: 636: 609: 606: 569:trestle bridge 540: 537: 432: 429: 396: 395: 386: 385: 382: 379: 378: 368: 367: 363: 362: 356: 352: 351: 346: 342: 341: 335: 331: 330: 324: 320: 319: 315: 314: 313: 312: 310:Stephen Breyer 278:Antonin Scalia 263: 260: 255: 249: 248: 244: 243: 233: 232: 228: 227: 121: 117: 116: 112: 111: 106: 102: 101: 90: 74: 70: 69: 64: 60: 59: 54: 53:Full case name 50: 49: 43: 42: 37: 29: 28: 20: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3012: 3001: 2998: 2996: 2993: 2991: 2988: 2986: 2983: 2981: 2978: 2976: 2973: 2971: 2968: 2966: 2963: 2962: 2960: 2936: 2935: 2931: 2928: 2927: 2923: 2920: 2919: 2915: 2912: 2911: 2907: 2904: 2903: 2899: 2898: 2896: 2894: 2890: 2883: 2882: 2878: 2875: 2874: 2870: 2869: 2867: 2865: 2861: 2857: 2850: 2846: 2831: 2830: 2826: 2823: 2822: 2818: 2815: 2814: 2810: 2807: 2806: 2802: 2799: 2798: 2794: 2791: 2790: 2786: 2783: 2782: 2778: 2775: 2774: 2770: 2767: 2766: 2762: 2759: 2758: 2754: 2751: 2750: 2746: 2745: 2743: 2739: 2732: 2731: 2727: 2724: 2723: 2719: 2716: 2715: 2711: 2708: 2707: 2703: 2700: 2699: 2695: 2694: 2692: 2686: 2679: 2678: 2674: 2671: 2670: 2666: 2663: 2662: 2658: 2655: 2654: 2650: 2647: 2646: 2642: 2639: 2638: 2634: 2631: 2630: 2626: 2623: 2622: 2618: 2615: 2614: 2610: 2607: 2606: 2602: 2599: 2598: 2594: 2591: 2590: 2586: 2583: 2582: 2578: 2575: 2574: 2570: 2567: 2566: 2562: 2559: 2558: 2554: 2551: 2550: 2546: 2543: 2542: 2538: 2535: 2534: 2530: 2527: 2526: 2522: 2519: 2518: 2514: 2511: 2510: 2506: 2503: 2502: 2498: 2495: 2494: 2490: 2487: 2486: 2482: 2479: 2478: 2474: 2471: 2470: 2466: 2463: 2462: 2458: 2455: 2454: 2450: 2447: 2446: 2442: 2439: 2438: 2434: 2431: 2430: 2426: 2423: 2422: 2418: 2415: 2414: 2410: 2407: 2406: 2402: 2399: 2398: 2394: 2391: 2390: 2386: 2383: 2382: 2378: 2375: 2374: 2370: 2367: 2366: 2362: 2359: 2358: 2354: 2351: 2350: 2346: 2343: 2342: 2338: 2337: 2335: 2333:Death penalty 2331: 2324: 2323: 2319: 2316: 2315: 2311: 2308: 2307: 2303: 2300: 2299: 2295: 2292: 2291: 2287: 2284: 2283: 2279: 2276: 2275: 2271: 2268: 2267: 2263: 2260: 2259: 2258:Solem v. Helm 2255: 2252: 2251: 2247: 2244: 2243: 2239: 2236: 2235: 2231: 2230: 2228: 2226:Incarceration 2224: 2220: 2213: 2209: 2204: 2197: 2192: 2190: 2185: 2183: 2178: 2177: 2174: 2167: 2166: 2162: 2159: 2158: 2154: 2151: 2150: 2146: 2143: 2142: 2138: 2135: 2133: 2129: 2124: 2115: 2106: 2097: 2088: 2087:CourtListener 2079: 2072: 2068: 2064: 2060: 2059: 2051: 2048: 2043: 2037: 2032: 2026: 2023: 2022: 2018: 2014: 2011: 2010: 2006: 2002: 2001: 1981: 1977: 1971: 1955: 1951: 1945: 1930: 1926: 1920: 1912: 1908: 1904: 1900: 1896: 1889: 1881: 1877: 1873: 1869: 1865: 1861: 1854: 1847: 1839: 1835: 1831: 1824: 1816: 1812: 1806: 1798: 1794: 1790: 1786: 1782: 1778: 1774: 1767: 1759: 1755: 1751: 1747: 1743: 1739: 1732: 1725: 1720: 1713: 1708: 1700: 1696: 1692: 1688: 1683: 1678: 1674: 1670: 1666: 1659: 1651: 1647: 1643: 1639: 1635: 1628: 1626: 1624: 1622: 1620: 1611: 1607: 1600: 1598: 1596: 1594: 1592: 1590: 1588: 1586: 1584: 1582: 1574: 1569: 1562: 1561: 1560:habeas corpus 1556: 1552: 1548: 1543: 1536: 1532: 1527: 1521: 1514: 1511: 1507: 1503: 1502: 1496: 1489: 1485: 1481: 1477: 1473: 1470: 1466: 1461: 1454: 1450: 1445: 1439: 1431: 1426: 1425: 1418: 1411: 1407: 1403: 1400: 1396: 1391: 1382: 1380: 1370: 1361: 1353: 1341: 1333: 1328: 1327: 1320: 1313: 1308: 1306: 1298: 1293: 1285: 1280: 1279: 1272: 1263: 1251: 1242: 1234: 1227: 1222: 1220: 1218: 1208: 1204:Wayne Myers, 1200: 1193: 1188: 1181: 1178: 1174: 1170: 1169: 1163: 1156: 1153: 1149: 1145: 1144: 1138: 1131: 1127: 1124: 1120: 1116: 1111: 1107: 1091: 1082: 1072: 1062: 1058: 1048: 1045: 1042: 1041: 1037: 1034: 1033: 1029: 1026: 1025: 1021: 1020: 1014: 1012: 1011: 1006: 1001: 999: 998: 993: 992: 987: 977: 975: 970: 966: 962: 957: 954: 951: 919: 914: 905: 903: 899: 895: 890: 887: 883: 874: 872: 867: 865: 861: 857: 853: 849: 833: 830: 821: 819: 815: 810: 809: 803: 798: 794: 792: 787: 783: 781: 777: 773: 764: 756: 754: 748: 744: 739: 734: 731: 728: 722: 718: 712: 708: 704: 703: 702: 697: 695: 691: 685: 683: 678: 676: 672: 668: 664: 660: 655: 647: 645: 638:Supreme Court 635: 632: 629: 625: 621: 620: 614: 605: 603: 599: 598:death penalty 593: 590: 586: 580: 578: 577:Meramec River 574: 570: 566: 562: 558: 554: 550: 546: 536: 534: 529: 525: 520: 518: 514: 510: 509: 504: 499: 497: 496: 491: 487: 486: 480: 478: 477: 472: 471: 466: 465: 460: 459: 454: 453: 446: 444: 440: 439: 428: 426: 425: 420: 416: 412: 408: 404: 403: 393: 392: 387: 380: 377: 373: 369: 364: 360: 357: 353: 350: 347: 343: 339: 336: 332: 328: 325: 321: 318:Case opinions 316: 311: 307: 303: 299: 295: 291: 287: 283: 279: 275: 271: 267: 264: 261: 259: 256: 254:Chief Justice 253: 252: 250: 245: 241: 240: 234: 229: 225: 221: 217: 213: 209: 206: 202: 198: 197:habeas corpus 194: 190: 186: 182: 178: 175: 171: 167: 166: 165:habeas corpus 161: 157: 153: 152: 147: 146: 141: 137: 134: 130: 126: 122: 118: 113: 110: 109:Oral argument 107: 103: 98: 94: 88: 87: 82: 79: 75: 71: 68: 65: 61: 58: 55: 51: 44: 40: 30: 25: 19: 2932: 2924: 2916: 2908: 2900: 2879: 2871: 2827: 2819: 2811: 2803: 2795: 2787: 2779: 2771: 2763: 2755: 2747: 2728: 2720: 2712: 2704: 2696: 2675: 2667: 2659: 2651: 2643: 2635: 2627: 2619: 2613:Baze v. Rees 2611: 2603: 2595: 2587: 2579: 2571: 2564: 2563: 2555: 2547: 2539: 2531: 2523: 2515: 2507: 2499: 2491: 2483: 2475: 2467: 2459: 2451: 2443: 2435: 2427: 2419: 2416:(1981, 1984) 2411: 2403: 2395: 2387: 2379: 2371: 2363: 2355: 2347: 2339: 2320: 2312: 2304: 2296: 2288: 2280: 2272: 2264: 2256: 2248: 2240: 2232: 2163: 2155: 2147: 2139: 2131: 2062: 2019: 2007: 1983:. Retrieved 1979: 1970: 1958:. Retrieved 1953: 1944: 1932:. Retrieved 1928: 1919: 1902: 1898: 1888: 1863: 1859: 1846: 1837: 1833: 1823: 1814: 1805: 1783:(6090): 25. 1780: 1776: 1766: 1741: 1737: 1731: 1723: 1719: 1711: 1707: 1672: 1668: 1658: 1641: 1637: 1609: 1605: 1572: 1568: 1558: 1546: 1542: 1525: 1520: 1515: (2002). 1499: 1495: 1479: 1464: 1460: 1443: 1438: 1422: 1417: 1409: 1394: 1390: 1369: 1352: 1340: 1324: 1323:Roy Malone, 1319: 1311: 1296: 1292: 1276: 1275:Tim Rowden, 1271: 1262: 1250: 1233: 1225: 1199: 1191: 1187: 1182: (1989). 1166: 1162: 1157: (1988). 1141: 1137: 1129: 1114: 1110: 1090: 1081: 1071: 1061: 1038: 1030: 1022: 1008: 1004: 1002: 995: 989: 985: 983: 958: 955: 949: 947: 917: 893: 891: 885: 881: 880: 870: 868: 859: 851: 844: 827: 820:amendments. 817: 806: 804: 800: 796: 791:Constitution 788: 784: 770: 762: 750: 746: 741: 736: 732: 726: 724: 720: 716: 699: 693: 689: 687: 679: 674: 656: 653: 643: 641: 633: 617: 615: 611: 594: 581: 542: 539:Case history 532: 527: 523: 521: 516: 506: 502: 500: 493: 489: 483: 481: 474: 468: 462: 456: 450: 447: 436: 434: 422: 401: 400: 399: 389: 366:Laws applied 305: 293: 290:David Souter 281: 269: 237: 215: 211: 210:(Mo. 2003) ( 200: 196: 184: 169: 163: 149: 143: 128: 127:; affirmed, 115:Case history 84: 56: 18: 2690:or injuries 2376:(Cal. 1972) 1866:(1): 46-7. 1744:(6): 9–10. 1537: 2003). 1455: 1997). 877:Foreign law 334:Concurrence 2959:Categories 1985:August 31, 1960:August 31, 1954:SCOTUSblog 1430:N.Y. Times 1410:Simmons II 1102:References 1010:certiorari 984:After the 706:behavior". 557:duct-taped 431:Background 417:to impose 242:overruled. 168:affirmed, 97:U.S. LEXIS 63:Docket no. 2024:, p. B01. 2012:, p. A01. 1934:April 26, 1905:(1): 52. 1677:CiteSeerX 1347:, at 957. 1314:, at 557. 1228:, at 556. 814:Article V 561:abducting 218:granted, 199:granted, 93:L. Ed. 2d 73:Citations 2205:case law 2061:Text of 1980:Casemine 1797:22767907 1758:19192706 1699:14664689 1482:denied, 1476:8th Cir. 1257:, at 56. 1017:See also 974:Maryland 963:, where 961:Virginia 894:Stanford 818:de facto 759:Dissents 727:Thompson 671:Virginia 663:Oklahoma 644:Stanford 549:burglary 545:Missouri 533:Stanford 528:Stanford 517:Stanford 349:O'Connor 323:Majority 187:denied, 181:8th Cir. 154:denied, 105:Argument 95:1; 2005 2078:Cornell 1880:3139255 1777:Science 1478:2001), 1312:Simmons 1297:Simmons 1226:Simmons 1130:Simmons 1076:bridge. 675:Sanford 522:In the 409:by the 355:Dissent 345:Dissent 338:Stevens 327:Kennedy 231:Holding 212:en banc 183:2001), 145:en banc 142:1997) ( 2937:(2023) 2929:(2019) 2921:(1998) 2913:(1993) 2905:(1989) 2884:(1987) 2876:(1951) 2832:(2024) 2824:(2020) 2816:(2011) 2808:(1994) 2800:(1993) 2792:(1991) 2784:(1989) 2776:(1976) 2768:(1968) 2760:(1962) 2752:(1958) 2733:(2002) 2725:(1992) 2717:(1977) 2680:(2019) 2672:(2019) 2664:(2017) 2656:(2016) 2648:(2016) 2640:(2015) 2632:(2014) 2624:(2008) 2616:(2008) 2608:(2007) 2600:(2006) 2592:(2006) 2584:(2006) 2568:(2005) 2560:(2004) 2552:(2002) 2544:(2002) 2536:(1993) 2528:(1990) 2520:(1990) 2512:(1989) 2504:(1989) 2496:(1988) 2488:(1988) 2480:(1988) 2472:(1987) 2464:(1986) 2456:(1986) 2448:(1985) 2440:(1985) 2432:(1984) 2424:(1982) 2408:(1980) 2400:(1978) 2392:(1977) 2384:(1976) 2368:(1972) 2360:(1971) 2352:(1947) 2344:(1879) 2325:(2021) 2317:(2017) 2309:(2016) 2301:(2012) 2293:(2010) 2285:(2003) 2277:(2003) 2269:(1991) 2261:(1983) 2253:(1980) 2245:(1962) 2237:(1910) 2126:  2120:  2117:  2111:  2108:  2105:Justia 2102:  2099:  2093:  2090:  2084:  2081:  2075:  1878:  1840:: 155. 1795:  1756:  1726:at 572 1714:at 571 1697:  1679:  1575:at 574 1549:, 1533: ( 1529:, 1504:, 1467:, 235 1451: ( 1447:, 1399:S.W.2d 1397:, 944 1194:at 571 1171:, 1146:, 1117:, 1043:(2012) 1035:(2010) 1027:(2008) 941:  935:  929:  923:  908:Impact 836:Debate 694:Atkins 690:Atkins 688:As in 684:says: 669:, and 553:murder 490:Atkins 394:(1989) 359:Scalia 308: 306:· 304:  296: 294:· 292:  284: 282:· 280:  272: 270:· 268:  205:S.W.3d 203:, 112 172:, 235 133:S.W.2d 131:, 944 67:03-633 2741:Other 2069: 1876:JSTOR 1856:(PDF) 1724:Roper 1712:Roper 1573:Roper 1553: 1508: 1486: 1480:cert. 1345:Myers 1255:Emens 1192:Roper 1175: 1150: 1121: 1053:Notes 986:Roper 918:Roper 886:Roper 882:Roper 871:amici 860:Roper 852:amici 667:Texas 524:Roper 222: 216:cert. 191: 185:cert. 158: 151:cert. 120:Prior 2071:U.S. 1987:2024 1962:2024 1936:2021 1793:PMID 1754:PMID 1695:PMID 1662:See 1555:U.S. 1510:U.S. 1488:U.S. 1472:1124 1469:F.3d 1177:U.S. 1152:U.S. 1123:U.S. 994:and 916:Pre- 900:and 778:and 551:and 479:). 473:and 455:and 224:U.S. 193:U.S. 177:1124 174:F.3d 160:U.S. 86:more 78:U.S. 76:543 2067:543 1907:doi 1868:doi 1838:119 1785:doi 1781:337 1746:doi 1687:doi 1646:doi 1610:119 1551:540 1535:Mo. 1513:304 1506:536 1484:534 1453:Mo. 1406:Mo. 1402:165 1180:361 1173:492 1155:815 1148:487 1126:551 1119:543 782:. 376:XIV 220:540 214:), 208:397 189:534 156:522 148:), 140:Mo. 136:165 81:551 2961:: 2065:, 1978:. 1952:. 1927:. 1903:38 1901:. 1897:. 1874:. 1864:98 1862:. 1858:. 1836:. 1832:. 1813:. 1791:. 1779:. 1775:. 1752:. 1742:38 1740:. 1693:, 1685:, 1673:58 1671:, 1642:44 1640:. 1636:. 1618:^ 1608:. 1580:^ 1563:.) 1427:, 1412:). 1378:^ 1329:, 1304:^ 1281:, 1216:^ 1132:). 793:: 665:, 604:. 535:. 467:, 374:, 2195:e 2188:t 2181:v 1989:. 1964:. 1938:. 1913:. 1909:: 1882:. 1870:: 1817:. 1799:. 1787:: 1760:. 1748:: 1702:. 1689:: 1652:. 1648:: 1474:( 1404:( 179:( 138:( 89:) 83:(

Index

Supreme Court of the United States
03-633
U.S.
551
more
L. Ed. 2d
U.S. LEXIS
Oral argument
Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Missouri
S.W.2d
165
Mo.
en banc
cert.
522
U.S.
habeas corpus
F.3d
1124
8th Cir.
534
U.S.
S.W.3d
397
540
U.S.
Stanford v. Kentucky
William Rehnquist
John P. Stevens
Sandra Day O'Connor

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.