| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Sandra Day O'Connor
|
Judicial dissenter |
6
|
1 |
This document appears to be a page from a book manuscript or legal memoir (page 176) discussing the US Supreme Court case *Tison v. Arizona*. The author (narrating in the first person) describes their reaction to Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's majority opinion, initially believing they had won based on the Court's acceptance that the Tison brothers did not intend to kill. The text analyzes the legal definitions of 'intent to kill' versus 'reckless indifference' in the context of the death penalty and the felony-murder rule.
This excerpt details the legal aftermath of the Tison gang crimes, focusing on the defense attorney's efforts to save the surviving brothers from the death penalty by appealing to the Supreme Court. It discusses the application of felony murder laws and analyzes the relevance of the precedent set by *Enmund v. Florida* (1982) regarding culpability and capital punishment. The text also highlights the challenges posed by the changing composition of the Supreme Court, specifically the appointments of conservative justices like Antonin Scalia and William Rehnquist.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity