JOSHUA I. MARTINEZ v. STATE OF FLORIDA

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that statistical 13 evidence that Arizona’s death penalty is discriminatorily imposed based on race, sex, and 14 socioeconomic background is insufficient to prove decisionmakers in petitioner’s case 15 acted with discriminatory purpose
• holding that 22 statistical evidence that Arizona’s death penalty is discriminatorily imposed based on race, 23 sex, and socioeconomic background is insufficient to prove decisionmakers in petitioner’s 24 case acted with discriminatory purpose
• holding that 10 statistical evidence that Arizona’s death penalty is discriminatorily imposed based on race, 11 sex, and socioeconomic background is insufficient to prove that decision makers in 12 petitioner’s case acted with discriminatory purpose
• Richmond's claim is that his \lengthy incarceration on death row during the pendency of his appeals [was] substantively and independently violative of the Constitution.\
• Richmond’s claim is that his “lengthy incarceration on death row during the pendency of his appeals [was] substantively and independently violative of the Constitution.”
• statistical evidence is insufficient 17 to prove that decisionmakers in petitioner’s case acted with discriminatory purpose

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).