Robert C. Kroner v. Everett Frazier, Commissioner, West Virginia Division of Motor Vehicles

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that it is “essential ... that the jury have before it all possible relevant information about the individual defendant whose fate it must determine”
• noting that it was “essential” that the jury “have before it all possible relevant information about the individual whose fate it must determine”
• suggesting that the future dangerousness special issue allowed the jury to consider prior criminal conduct, age, duress, and whether the defendant was under extreme mental pressure
• holding that the Texas sentencing scheme “clearly assures that all possible relevant information about the defendant will be adduced;” facts presented at trial related that defendant was “22 years of age, had been drinking beer all afternoon” on the day of the offense
• noting that the jury should “have before it all possible relevant information about the individual defendant whose fate it must determine.”
• noting that the court held in Woodson that an individualized sentencing determination is required under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).