State of West Virginia v. Donna L. Wilfong

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “so long as the evidence introduced [at a capital-sentencing hearing does] not prejudice a defendant, it is preferable not to impose restrictions”
• holding that the discretion of the sentencer must be guided by “objective standards so as to produce nondiscriminatory application”
• holding that the discretion of the sentencer must be guided by \objective standards so as to produce nondiscriminatory application\
• holding that prison inmate was not in custody for Miranda purposes because his freedom of movement was not restricted more than it would normally be in the prison environment
• holding that prison inmate was not in custody for Miranda purposes because his free-do n of movement was not restricted more than it would normally be in the pr son environment
• holding that punishments are cruel when they “involve the unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).