No. 18-8016
James Goff v. Ohio
IFP
Tags: capital-punishment death-penalty hurst-v-florida judicial-fact-finding jury-trial mitigation-evidence resentencing sentencing sixth-amendment
Key Terms:
DueProcess Punishment HabeasCorpus
DueProcess Punishment HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2019-06-13
Question Presented (from Petition)
Is a trial judge's independent weighing of new mitigation evidence and imposition of the death penalty at a resentencing hearing unconstitutional under Hurst v. Florida?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Is a trial judge's independent weighing of new mitigation evidence and imposition of the death penalty at a resentencing hearing unconstitutional under Hurst v. Florida?
Docket Entries
2019-06-17
Petition DENIED.
2019-05-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/13/2019.
2019-05-09
Brief of respondent State of Ohio in opposition filed.
2019-04-12
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 13, 2019.
2019-04-11
Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 21, 2019 to May 13, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-02-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 21, 2019)
Attorneys
James Goff
Angela Miller — Attorney at Law, Petitioner
Ohio
Richard W. Moyer — Prosecuting Attorney Clinton County, Respondent
State of Ohio
Benjamin Michael Flowers — Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost, Respondent