Simmons v. South Carolina
Simmons v. South Carolina | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Argued January 18, 1994 Decided June 17, 1994 | |
Full case name | Simmons v. South Carolina |
Citations | 512 U.S. 154 (more) |
Holding | |
Where a capital defendant's future dangerousness is at issue, and the only sentencing alternative to death is life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, due process entitles the defendant to inform the jury of his future parole ineligibility. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Plurality | Blackmun, joined by Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg |
Concurrence | Souter, joined by Stevens |
Concurrence | Ginsburg |
Concurrence | O'Connor, joined by Rehnquist, Kennedy, |
Dissent | Scalia, joined by Thomas |
Simmons v. South Carolina, 512 U.S. 154 (1994), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that where a capital defendant's future dangerousness is at issue, and the only sentencing alternative to death available to the jury is life imprisonment without possibility of parole, due process requires that the jury be informed of the defendant's parole ineligibility.
See also
External links
- Text of Simmons v. South Carolina, 512 U.S. 154 (1994) is available from: Cornell CourtListener Findlaw Oyez (oral argument audio)
This article is issued from
Wikipedia.
The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike.
Additional terms may apply for the media files.