Schriro v. Summerlin | |
---|---|
Argued April 19, 2004 Decided June 24, 2004 | |
Full case name | Dora B. Schriro, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections v. Warren Wesley Summerlin |
Citations | 542 U.S. 348 (more) 124 S. Ct. 2519; 159 L. Ed. 2d 442; 2004 U.S. LEXIS 4574; 72 U.S.L.W. 4561; 17 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 425 |
Case history | |
Prior | Summerlin v. Stewart, 267 F.3d 926 (9th Cir. 2001); opinion withdrawn, 281 F.3d 836 (9th Cir. 2002); on rehearing en banc, 341 F.3d 1082 (9th Cir. 2003); cert. granted, 540 U.S. 1045 (2003). |
Subsequent | Summerlin v. Schriro, 427 F.3d 623 |
Holding | |
Ring v. Arizona[1] does not apply retroactively to cases already final on direct review. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Scalia, joined by Rehnquist, O'Connor, Kennedy, Thomas |
Dissent | Breyer, joined by Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg |
Schriro v. Summerlin, 542 U.S. 348 (2004), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that a requirement that a different Supreme Court decision requiring the jury rather than the judge to find aggravating factors would not be applied retroactively.[2]