DiCroce v. McNeil Nutritionals, LLC

Oral argument

• Argued

  21 min recording
  Listen

Source: CourtListener oral-argument corpus (CC0).

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that changes in the death penalty statute between the time of the murder and the sentencing did not amount to an ex post facto violation
• holding that changes in the death penalty statute between the time of the murder and the sentencing did not amount to an ex post facto violation
• holding that when law violating the Illinois single subject rule was void ab initio, it was not an \operative fact\ under Dobbert.
• holding that a change in the law, if merely procedural, does not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause, even if detrimental to the defendant
• holding that changing the roles of judge and jury was procedural and, therefore, not an ex post facto violation
• holding it “axiomatic that for a law to be ex post facto it must be more onerous than the prior law”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).