Arave v. Creech

Last updated

Arave v. Creech
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Decided March 30, 1993
Full case nameArave v. Creech
Citations507 U.S. 463 ( more )
Holding
When a state uses a consistent narrowing definition for a broad term like "utter disregard," the broad term can function as a valid aggravating circumstance under the Fourteenth Amendment.
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
Byron White  · Harry Blackmun
John P. Stevens  · Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia  · Anthony Kennedy
David Souter  · Clarence Thomas
Case opinions
MajorityO'Connor
DissentBlackmun, joined by Stevens
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. XIV

Arave v. Creech, 507 U.S. 463 (1993), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that, when a state uses a consistent narrowing definition for a broad term like "utter disregard," the broad term can function as a valid aggravating circumstance under the Fourteenth Amendment. [1] [2]

Related Research Articles

In the terminology of law, an assault is the act of causing physical harm or unwanted physical contact to another person, or, in some legal definitions, the threat or attempt to do so. It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in criminal prosecution, civil liability, or both. Additionally, assault is a criminal act in which a person intentionally causes fear of physical harm or offensive contact to another person. Assault can be committed with or without a weapon and can range from physical violence to threats of violence. Assault is frequently referred to as an attempt to commit battery, which is the deliberate use of physical force against another person. The deliberate inflicting of fear, apprehension, or terror is another definition of assault that can be found in several legal systems. Depending on the severity of the offense, assault may result in a fine, imprisonment, or even death.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Charles Bowen, Baron Bowen</span> English judge

Charles Synge Christopher Bowen, Baron Bowen, was an English judge.

Battery is a criminal offense involving unlawful physical contact, distinct from assault, which is the act of creating reasonable fear or apprehension of such contact.

Boynton v. Virginia, 364 U.S. 454 (1960), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court. The case overturned a judgment convicting an African American law student for trespassing by being in a restaurant in a bus terminal which was "whites only". It held that racial segregation in public transportation was illegal because such segregation violated the Interstate Commerce Act, which broadly forbade discrimination in interstate passenger transportation. It moreover held that bus transportation was sufficiently related to interstate commerce to allow the United States federal government to regulate it to forbid racial discrimination in the industry.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wyatt Creech</span> New Zealand politician

Wyatt Beetham Creech is a retired New Zealand politician. He served as the 14th deputy prime minister of New Zealand in Jenny Shipley's National Party government from August 1998 to December 1999.

Gregg v. Georgia, Proffitt v. Florida, Jurek v. Texas, Woodson v. North Carolina, and Roberts v. Louisiana, 428 U.S. 153 (1976), is a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court. It reaffirmed the Court's acceptance of the use of the death penalty in the United States, upholding, in particular, the death sentence imposed on Troy Leon Gregg. The set of cases is referred to by a leading scholar as the July 2 Cases, and elsewhere referred to by the lead case Gregg. The court set forth the two main features that capital sentencing procedures must employ in order to comply with the Eighth Amendment ban on "cruel and unusual punishments". The decision essentially ended the de facto moratorium on the death penalty imposed by the Court in its 1972 decision in Furman v. Georgia (1972). Justice Brennan's dissent famously argued that "The calculated killing of a human being by the State involves, by its very nature, a denial of the executed person's humanity ... An executed person has indeed 'lost the right to have rights.'"

Capital murder refers to a category of murder in some parts of the US for which the perpetrator is eligible for the death penalty. In its original sense, capital murder was a statutory offence of aggravated murder in Great Britain, Northern Ireland, and the Republic of Ireland, which was later adopted as a legal provision to define certain forms of aggravated murder in the United States. Some jurisdictions that provide for death as a possible punishment for murder, such as California, do not have a specific statute creating or defining a crime known as capital murder; instead, death is one of the possible sentences for certain kinds of murder. In these cases, "capital murder" is not a phrase used in the legal system but may still be used by others such as the media.

Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment required the government to demonstrate both a compelling interest and that the law in question was narrowly tailored before it denied unemployment compensation to someone who was fired because her job requirements substantially conflicted with her religion.

Walton v. Arizona, 497 U.S. 639 (1990), was a United States Supreme Court case that upheld two important aspects of the capital sentencing scheme in Arizona—judicial sentencing and the aggravating factor "especially heinous, cruel, or depraved"—as not unconstitutionally vague. The Court overruled the first of these holdings in Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002). The second holdings was not overturned.

Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty Association, 500 U.S. 507 (1991), deals with First Amendment rights and unions in public employment.

Cunningham v. California, 549 U.S. 270 (2007), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held, 6–3, that the sentencing standard set forward in Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) applies to California's determinate sentencing law.

The term aggravated felony was used in the United States immigration law to refer to a broad category of criminal offenses that carry certain severe consequences for aliens seeking asylum, legal permanent resident status, citizenship, or avoidance of deportation proceedings. Anyone convicted of an aggravated felony and removed from the United States "must remain outside of the United States for twenty consecutive years from the deportation date before he or she is eligible to re-enter the United States." The supreme court ruled 5-4 in Sessions v. Dimaya that the residual clause was unconstitutionally vague limiting the term.

Saudi Arabia v. Nelson, 507 U.S. 349 (1993), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court considered the term "based upon a commercial activity" within the meaning of the first clause of 1605(a)(2) of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">KNRS (AM)</span> Radio station in Salt Lake City, Utah

KNRS is an AM radio station licensed to Salt Lake City, Utah. The station is owned by iHeartMedia, Inc.. KNRS and sister station 105.9 KNRS-FM simulcast a talk radio format. The studios are located in West Valley City and the transmitter site is located off West 2300 North Street in Salt Lake City. KNRS operates with 5,000 watts around the clock, covering most of Northern Utah. Other iHeart stations in the Salt Lake City metropolitan area include KAAZ-FM, KZHT, KJMY, and KODJ.

Moncrieffe v. Holder, 569 U.S. 184 (2013), is a United States Supreme Court decision in which the court ruled in a 7–2 decision that "social sharing of a small amount of marijuana" by a legal immigrant does not constitute aggravated felony and so does not require mandatory deportation.

Lockhart v. Fretwell, 506 U.S. 364 (1993), is a decision of the United States Supreme Court which held that failure to make an objection under Collins v. Lockhart did not constitute undue prejudice required by Strickland v. Washington, because the error did not cause a fundamentally unfair trial, as opposed to merely a different outcome of the case.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Thomas Eugene Creech</span> American murderer, death row inmate and self-confessed serial killer

Thomas Eugene Creech is an American serial killer who was convicted of two murders committed in 1974 and sentenced to death in Idaho. The sentence was reduced two years later on appeal to life imprisonment. He was sent back to Idaho's death row for a 1981 murder committed while imprisoned. Creech personally confessed to a total of 42 murders in various states, some of which allegedly involved the Hells Angels and the Church of Satan. Most of his additional confessions are uncorroborated, but police believe strong evidence links Creech to seven additional murder victims. In January 2024, an investigation by the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department concluded that Creech murdered Daniel A. Walker.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Amanda Brailsford</span> American judge (born 1967)

Amanda Kathleen Brailsford is a United States district judge of the United States District Court for the District of Idaho. She previously served as a judge of the Idaho Court of Appeals from 2019 to 2023.

References

  1. Arave v. Creech, 507 U.S. 463 (1993).
  2. Lieberman, Jethro K. (1999). "Aggravating Circumstances". A Practical Companion to the Constitution. p. 40.