Lynch v. Arizona
Holding
When the state has put a capital defendant"s future dangerousness at issue and acknowledged that the only possible sentence besides death is life imprisonment without parole, the defendant has a right to inform the jury of that fact, and the Arizona Supreme Court erred in holding to the contrary.
Judgment
Reversed and remanded, 6-2 on May 31, 2016. Justice Thomas wrote a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Alito joined.
Feb 25, 2016Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 30, 2016)
Mar 29, 2016Brief of respondent Arizona in opposition filed.
Apr 7, 2016Reply of petitioner Shawn Patrick Lynch filed.
Apr 14, 2016DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 29, 2016.
May 9, 2016DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 12, 2016.
May 16, 2016DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 19, 2016.
May 23, 2016DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 26, 2016.
May 31, 2016Motion to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED. Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Opinion per curiam. (Detached Opinion). Justice Thomas, with whom Justice Alito joins, dissenting. (Detached Opinion)
Jul 5, 2016JUDGMENT ISSUED
Jul 5, 2016MANDATE ISSUED
Recommended Citation: Lynch v. Arizona, SCOTUSblog, https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/lynch-v-arizona/