Tenth Circuit· 10/6/1986

Andrews v. Shulsen

Citations

802 F.2d 1256

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

a jury need not make specific written findings of aggravating and mitigating circumstances for purposes of review if the sentencing mechanism is otherwise valid
“trial judge recited the statutory mitigating circumstances, although he did not label them as such or explain their meaning and function”
Utah provides for weighing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances to determine appropriate sentence in capital cases
Utah provides for weighing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances to determine appropriate sentence in capital cases
this court adopted district court opinion concerning the treatment of napkin incident.
when only dne line of defense available, counsel must investigate it

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Seymour

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

35 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

60 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Andrews v. Shulsen

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.