Fourth Circuit· 3/17/2010

United States v. Caro

Citations

597 F.3d 608
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 5511
2010 WL 963201

How courts have described this case

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

\[T]he cases used by the Court in Miller to support its holding have been applied retroactively on both direct and collateral review. See In re Sparks
\[T]he cases used by the Court in Miller to support its holding have been applied retroactively on both direct and collateral review. See In re Sparks
holding that during a capital sentencing, a defendant's silence cannot be considered as proof of his lack of remorse but his \affirmative words or conduct\ can
holding that the district court properly quashed the subpoena for lack of specificity because \Caro can only speculate as to what the requested information would have shown\
noting that U.S. Supreme Court case law suggests that \considering a defendant's silence\ regarding the aggravating circumstance of lack of remorse \may well [be] prohibit{ed]\ under the Fifth Amendment
observing that consideration of a defendant’s silence to prove lack of remorse may violate the Fifth Amendment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Gregory, Shedd, Duncan

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Other cases named United States v. Caro

17 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.