State v. Jaco

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, because a defendant’s sentence was within the original unenhanced range of punishment, “any facts that would have tended to assess her punishment within that range were not required to be found beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury”
• holding that, because a defendant’s sentence was within the original unenhanced range of punishment, “any facts that would have tended to assess her punishment within that range were not required to be found beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury”
• observing that under the Due Process Clause as interpreted in Brady, “the state is required to disclose exculpatory evidence that might be material to the outcome of a case.”
• observing that under the Due Process Clause as interpreted in Brady , \the state is required to disclose exculpatory evidence that might be material to the outcome of a case.\
• at section 557.036 penalty phase hearing, jury not required to find facts beyond a reasonable doubt to impose a sentence that is within an unenhanced range of punishment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).