Ring v. Arizona

Ring v. Arizona
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued April 22, 2002
Decided June 24, 2002
Full case nameTimothy Stuart Ring v. Arizona
Citations536 U.S. 584 (more)
122 S. Ct. 2428; 153 L. Ed. 2d 556; 2002 U.S. LEXIS 4651; 70 U.S.L.W. 4666; 2002 Cal. Daily Op. Service 5594; 2002 Daily Journal DAR 7047; 15 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 464
Case history
PriorOn writ of cert. to the Sup. Court of Arizona. State v. Ring, 200 Ariz. 267
Holding
A sentencing judge, sitting without a jury, cannot find an aggravating circumstance necessary for imposition of the death penalty. Because Arizona's enumerated aggravating factors operate as "the functional equivalent of an element of a greater offense," the Sixth Amendment requires that they be found by a jury. 597-609.
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy
David Souter · Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg · Stephen Breyer
Case opinions
MajorityGinsburg, joined by Stevens, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas
ConcurrenceScalia, joined by Thomas
ConcurrenceKennedy
ConcurrenceBreyer (in judgment)
DissentO'Connor, joined by Rehnquist
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. VI
This case overturned a previous ruling or rulings
Walton v. Arizona (1990)

Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court applied the rule of Apprendi v. New Jersey[1] to capital sentencing schemes, holding that the Sixth Amendment requires a jury to find the aggravating factors necessary for imposing the death penalty.[2] Ring overruled a portion of Walton v. Arizona,[3] which had rejected that contention.

  1. ^ Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000).
  2. ^ Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002).
  3. ^ Walton v. Arizona, 497 U.S. 639 (1990).