State of Arizona v. Shawna Forde

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that victim impact testimony is not limited to mitigation topics presented by defense
• holding that the \(F)(2) aggravator does not violate the Eighth Amendment\ because it \channels and limits the sentencer's discretion by explicitly identifying which offenses qualify as 'serious offenses' \
• holding that victim impact testimony is not limited to mitigation topics presented by defense
• acknowledging that court procedures emanate from court rules and caselaw
• rejecting argument that the trial court erred by prohibiting defense counsel “from asking prospective jurors both to identify mitigation they would consider sufficient to call for leniency and to opine on whether specific circumstances would constitute such mitigation”
• because both sender and recipient were registered subscribers of phone numbers and both possessed phones used to send and receive, prosecution met its authentication burden

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).