
Loading…

Loading…
Opinion
122 L. Ed. 2d 684 · Supreme Court of the United States · Feb 22, 1993
District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 19, 2012
Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · Apr 29, 2011
District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 14, 2011
Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · Oct 1, 2010
Seventh Circuit · Sep 22, 2010
Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · May 28, 2010
Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · Feb 5, 2010
Parentheticals
holding that a reference to a capital-murder defendant's parole officer did not rise to the level of plain error
Finding that defendant's attack on the chain of custody goes to the weight of the chemist's testimony rather than the admissibility.
"[w]hile th[e] failure [to object] does not preclude our review [in capital cases], it does weigh against any claim of prejudice"
"We do not find Alabama's method of allocating the burdens of proof unconstitutional."
wherein the appellant had argued that the trial court erred in its sentencing order in stating that "the court holds that the aggravating circumstances outweigh the mitigating circumstances and compel the court to affix punishment at death"
broad and general statements of law in judicial opinions must be read in the context of the facts before the court, and cannot be uncritically transposed to different factual circumstances
no plain error when witness said that defendant had a parole officer