Knowledge (XXG)

People v. Anderson

Source 📝

49: 518:
or unusual. "Cruelty" is not definable with precision. It is in the eye of the beholder: what may be perceived as cruelty by one person is seen as justice by another. Thus, this court, in ascertaining the permissible limits of punishment, must look in the first instance to those values to which the people of our state subscribe. That as one individual I prefer values more lofty than those implicit in the macabre process of deliberately exterminating a human being does not permit me to interpret in my image the common values of the people of our state.
363:(as opposed to prohibiting ones that violate both conditions), the court found the penalty unconstitutional on state constitutional grounds since if it violated either provision it was unconstitutional at the state level. The court even went so far as to decline to even consider if the death penalty violates the 370:
The state contended that while the use of capital punishment served no rehabilitating purposes, it was a legitimate punishment for retribution in serious offenses, in that it served to isolate the offender, and was a useful deterrent to crime. The court rejected the state's defense citing that there
517:
The people of California responded quickly and emphatically, both directly and through their elected representatives, to callously declare that whatever the trends elsewhere in the nation and the world, society in our state does not deem the retributive extinction of a human life to be either cruel
330:
Furthermore, the court also cited the view of capital punishment in American society as one of the most important reasons for its acceptability, contending that a growing population and a decreasing number of executions was persuasive evidence that such a punishment was no longer condoned by the
307:
In the original case (1966), the court did not raise the issue as to whether the death penalty was unconstitutional. In the second hearing, which also took place in 1968, the court did raise the issue but decided that the death penalty was neither cruel nor unusual. However, in view of
453:
also had his death sentence for the assassination of Robert Kennedy commuted to life in prison. It would also mean that if any person was ever charged with a murder committed in California before 1972, the death penalty could not be imposed. The United States Supreme Court in
534:, which revisits the events and sequelae of San Diego's longest (at the time, four hours) armed siege/shootout at the Hub Loans & Jewelry Company. A newspaper editor died of a heart attack. Over a thousand rounds were exchanged betweend the shooter and a 480:
Later in 1972, the people of California amended the state constitution by initiative process, superseding the court ruling and reinstating the death penalty. Rather than simply switch to the federal "cruel and unusual" standard, the amendment, called
1567: 350:
All persons shall be bailable by sufficient sureties, unless for capital offenses when the proof is evident or the presumption great. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed; nor shall cruel
1499: 274:
The case was an automatic appeal to the court under section 1239b of the California Penal Code, which provides that, following a death sentence, the case is automatically appealed to the State Supreme Court.
407:
that the death penalty—as then practiced in almost all of the states that used it—was unconstitutional.) As it turned out, the U.S. Supreme Court would set aside the question whether the death penalty was
610: 327:
as it degraded and dehumanized the parties involved. It held that the penalty is "unnecessary to any legitimate goal of the state and incompatible with the dignity of man and the judicial process".
421:
McComb also argued that the death penalty deterred crime, noting numerous Supreme Court precedents upholding the death penalty's constitutionality, and stating that the legislative and
296:(1968), which decided that it was illegal to remove a juror who simply disagreed with the death penalty unless the juror adamantly refused to follow the law under any circumstances. 389: 678: 476:
and stated that any prisoner currently under sentence of death could petition a superior court to modify its judgment. thus no longer faces a realistic threat of execution...
764: 800: 364: 335: 738: 496:
capital statutes (including the one in California, but excluding others like the one in Rhode Island) in the U.S. to be unconstitutional, plus extensive appellate and
312:, the court found that the defendant's death sentence was unconstitutionally decided. In this third hearing, the court changed its mind and decided the death penalty 618: 232: 1572: 468:
declared capital punishment in California unconstitutional under Art. 1, 6, of the state constitution... The California Supreme Court declared in the
791: 1577: 355:
unusual punishments be inflicted. Witnesses shall not be unreasonably detained, nor confined in any room where criminals are actually imprisoned.
441:
decision caused all capital sentences in the state of California to be commuted to life in prison. Notably, it is because of this decision that
346:
and Article 1, Section 6 of the California Constitution (the provision has since moved to Article 1, Section 17), which read (emphasis added):
946: 485:, kept the "cruel or unusual" standard, but followed it with a clause expressly declaring the death penalty to be neither cruel nor unusual. 210: 1562: 709: 400: 522:
Anderson's sentence was later commuted, and, in 1976, he was paroled and moved to Seattle. He died there in 1999 at the age of 62.
425:
processes were the only appropriate avenues to determine whether the death penalty should be allowed. McComb was so upset about the
559: 482: 259: 236: 371:
were far less onerous means of isolating the offender, and the lack of proof that capital punishment is an effective deterrent.
130:
The use of capital punishment in the state of California was deemed unconstitutional because it was considered cruel or unusual.
1426: 263: 282:, attempted murder of three men, and first-degree robbery. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the lower court in 784: 324: 1582: 1515: 593: 251: 54: 367:
since it had already found it to be in violation of the state constitution. The court decided it on April 24, 1972.
606: 214: 1378: 1050: 31: 509:
In a 1978 concurring opinion, Justice Mosk expressed his dismay at the response of the California electorate to
1531: 1478: 299:
The case was retried on the issue of the defendant's penalty, and the jury again returned a verdict of death.
1042: 1507: 903: 777: 292: 229: 1490: 1354: 954: 839: 831: 1461: 1258: 1202: 1082: 446: 393: 206: 502:
litigation in capital cases, no death sentences were carried out in the state until 1992. That year,
286:
64 Cal.2d 633 (1966), but it reversed its decision with respect to the sentence of the death penalty
1218: 1114: 1106: 1090: 1074: 919: 863: 456: 1319: 1274: 1010: 911: 871: 758: 503: 403:
and that the court should await its decision before ruling. (The U.S. Supreme Court later ruled in
279: 165: 1386: 1311: 1266: 1138: 1130: 1058: 1034: 1002: 879: 719: 695: 422: 380: 320: 173: 153: 1402: 1394: 1370: 1295: 1186: 1154: 1122: 1018: 962: 938: 895: 887: 847: 705: 385: 169: 699: 589: 30:
For the case involving evidentiary factors necessary for first degree murder conviction, see
1523: 1418: 1303: 1242: 1234: 1162: 1098: 1066: 1026: 986: 978: 414: 143: 1362: 1226: 1194: 1178: 1170: 1146: 994: 769: 731: 614: 1470: 1410: 1346: 1327: 1250: 539: 461: 442: 396: 161: 17: 1556: 855: 543: 498: 450: 1210: 538:
team. The "murder case would eventually make California judicial history and keep
157: 83: 262:
for nine months until the enactment of a constitutional amendment reinstating it,
643: 445:
avoided execution following his conviction and resulting death sentence for the "
108: 102: 752: 547: 334:
The case also turned on a difference in wording between the U.S. Constitution's
655: 255: 106:[51 Cal.Rptr. 238, 414 P.2d 366]; sentence reversed and remanded, 1500:
Browning-Ferris Industries of Vermont, Inc. v. Kelco Disposal, Inc.
535: 1449: 812: 773: 48: 1568:
Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause and death penalty case law
701:
The Hub Shootout: San Diego's Unbelievable Four-hour Firefight
532:
The Hub Shootout: San Diego's Unbelievable Four-hour Firefight
359:
Since the State Constitution prohibits a punishment which is
247:
The People of the State of California v. Robert Page Anderson
73:
The People of the State of California v. Robert Page Anderson
694:
Culea, John; Willard, Steve, Editor; Jensen, Terry, Editor;
383:
wrote a brief dissent on the basis that the landmark case,
666: 188:
Wright, joined by Peters, Tobriner, Mosk, Burke, Sullivan
87:; 493 P.2d 880; 100 Cal. Rptr. 152; 1972 Cal. LEXIS 154 464:(1972) denied an appeal of a death sentence because: 418:
it ruled that the death penalty was constitutional).
1489: 1460: 1338: 1285: 930: 823: 698:; Culea, Patti, Photographer (September 15, 2018). 290:, 69 Cal.2d 613 (1968) following the landmark case 200: 192: 184: 179: 149: 139: 134: 124: 116: 96: 91: 78: 68: 62: 41: 365:Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution 515: 466: 399: (1972) was currently on the docket of the 348: 429:decision that he walked out of the courtroom. 785: 27:Landmark case in the U.S. state of California 8: 254:1972), was a landmark case in the state of 1457: 1446: 820: 809: 792: 778: 770: 488:Due to the U.S. Supreme Court decision in 38: 765:Ninth Circuit Capital Punishment Handbook 737:CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list ( 611:"Dissenter Is Upset, Walks Out of Court" 100:Defendant convicted; judgment affirmed, 576: 727: 717: 704:(Paperback). Independently published. 278:Robert Page Anderson was convicted of 947:Louisiana ex rel. Francis v. Resweber 7: 474:its decision was fully retroactive 401:Supreme Court of the United States 25: 506:was executed in the gas chamber. 1573:Capital punishment in California 560:Capital punishment in California 319:The court ruled that the use of 47: 530:The incident was documented in 250:, 493 P.2d 880, 6 Cal. 3d 628 ( 120:Certiorari denied, 406 U.S. 958 1578:1972 in United States case law 1427:City of Grants Pass v. Johnson 801:United States Eighth Amendment 492:later the same year declaring 1: 323:was considered impermissibly 814:Cruel and unusual punishment 361:either of the two conditions 1516:United States v. Bajakajian 412:unconstitutional (later in 55:Supreme Court of California 1599: 696:Lampert, Bob, Photographer 607:United Press International 29: 1563:California state case law 1456: 1445: 1379:South Carolina v. Gathers 1051:Skipper v. South Carolina 819: 808: 237:California Proposition 17 228: 221: 205: 129: 112:[73 Cal.Rptr. 21] 46: 32:People v. Anderson (1968) 1532:Tyler v. Hennepin County 1479:United States v. Salerno 1451:Excessive bail and fines 755:Retrieved April 7, 2008. 63:Argued February 18, 1972 1508:Austin v. United States 1043:Caldwell v. Mississippi 904:Montgomery v. Louisiana 761:(Registration Required) 293:Witherspoon v. Illinois 230:California Constitution 215:California Constitution 1491:Excessive Fines Clause 1355:Robinson v. California 971:California v. Anderson 955:McGautha v. California 840:Robinson v. California 832:Weems v. United States 520: 478: 357: 18:California v. Anderson 1462:Excessive Bail Clause 1203:Panetti v. Quarterman 1083:Maynard v. Cartwright 609:(February 18, 1972). 590:6 Cal. 3d 628 1219:Kennedy v. Louisiana 1115:Whitmore v. Arkansas 1107:Stanford v. Kentucky 1091:Thompson v. Oklahoma 1075:Lowenfield v. Phelps 920:Jones v. Mississippi 864:Harmelin v. Michigan 759:Opinion of the Court 753:Opinion of the Court 457:Aikens v. California 449:" murders in 1969. 233:Article I section 27 1395:Helling v. McKinney 1320:Hudson v. McMillian 1286:Corporal punishment 1275:Bucklew v. Precythe 1011:Spaziano v. Florida 912:Virginia v. LeBlanc 872:Ewing v. California 504:Robert Alton Harris 280:first-degree murder 217:Article I section 6 166:Raymond L. Sullivan 1583:1972 in California 1387:Payne v. Tennessee 1312:Ingraham v. Wright 1267:Madison v. Alabama 1139:Atkins v. Virginia 1131:Herrera v. Collins 1059:Ford v. Wainwright 1035:Glass v. Louisiana 1003:Godfrey v. Georgia 880:Lockyer v. Andrade 730:has generic name ( 656:Hub Loans Shootout 640:People v. Frierson 585:People v. Anderson 381:Marshall F. McComb 344:unusual punishment 321:capital punishment 316:cruel or unusual. 284:People v. Anderson 260:capital punishment 174:Marshall F. McComb 154:Mathew O. Tobriner 150:Associate Justices 117:Subsequent history 42:People v. Anderson 1550: 1549: 1546: 1545: 1542: 1541: 1441: 1440: 1437: 1436: 1403:Farmer v. Brennan 1371:Estelle v. Gamble 1296:Jackson v. Bishop 1187:Hill v. McDonough 1155:Tennard v. Dretke 1123:Walton v. Arizona 1019:Enmund v. Florida 963:Furman v. Georgia 939:Wilkerson v. Utah 896:Miller v. Alabama 888:Graham v. Florida 848:Rummel v. Estelle 667:Culea et al. 2018 621:on March 31, 2020 386:Furman v. Georgia 338:argument against 243: 242: 170:Raymond E. Peters 16:(Redirected from 1590: 1524:Timbs v. Indiana 1458: 1447: 1419:Kahler v. Kansas 1304:Gates v. Collier 1243:Hurst v. Florida 1235:Glossip v. Gross 1163:Roper v. Simmons 1099:Penry v. Lynaugh 1067:Tison v. Arizona 1027:Pulley v. Harris 987:Coker v. Georgia 979:Gregg v. Georgia 821: 810: 794: 787: 780: 771: 742: 735: 729: 725: 723: 715: 681: 679:The Hub Shootout 676: 670: 664: 658: 653: 647: 637: 631: 630: 628: 626: 617:. Archived from 603: 597: 587: 581: 415:Gregg v. Georgia 331:general public. 325:cruel or unusual 144:Donald R. Wright 135:Court membership 111: 105: 86: 51: 50: 39: 21: 1598: 1597: 1593: 1592: 1591: 1589: 1588: 1587: 1553: 1552: 1551: 1538: 1485: 1452: 1433: 1363:Powell v. Texas 1334: 1307:(5th Cir. 1974) 1299:(8th Cir. 1968) 1287: 1281: 1227:Hall v. Florida 1195:Kansas v. Marsh 1179:Oregon v. Guzek 1174:(5th Cir. 2005) 1171:Bigby v. Dretke 1147:Ring v. Arizona 995:Lockett v. Ohio 926: 815: 804: 798: 749: 736: 726: 716: 712: 693: 690: 685: 684: 677: 673: 665: 661: 654: 650: 638: 634: 624: 622: 615:The Modesto Bee 605: 604: 600: 583: 582: 578: 573: 568: 556: 528: 435: 377: 305: 272: 224: 207:Cal. Penal Code 107: 101: 82: 64: 58: 35: 28: 23: 22: 15: 12: 11: 5: 1596: 1594: 1586: 1585: 1580: 1575: 1570: 1565: 1555: 1554: 1548: 1547: 1544: 1543: 1540: 1539: 1537: 1536: 1528: 1520: 1512: 1504: 1495: 1493: 1487: 1486: 1484: 1483: 1475: 1471:Stack v. Boyle 1466: 1464: 1454: 1453: 1450: 1443: 1442: 1439: 1438: 1435: 1434: 1432: 1431: 1423: 1415: 1411:Brown v. Plata 1407: 1399: 1391: 1383: 1375: 1367: 1359: 1351: 1347:Trop v. Dulles 1342: 1340: 1336: 1335: 1333: 1332: 1328:Hope v. Pelzer 1324: 1316: 1308: 1300: 1291: 1289: 1283: 1282: 1280: 1279: 1271: 1263: 1259:Moore v. Texas 1255: 1251:Kansas v. Carr 1247: 1239: 1231: 1223: 1215: 1207: 1199: 1191: 1183: 1175: 1167: 1159: 1151: 1143: 1135: 1127: 1119: 1111: 1103: 1095: 1087: 1079: 1071: 1063: 1055: 1047: 1039: 1031: 1023: 1015: 1007: 999: 991: 983: 975: 967: 959: 951: 943: 934: 932: 928: 927: 925: 924: 916: 908: 900: 892: 884: 876: 868: 860: 852: 844: 836: 827: 825: 817: 816: 813: 806: 805: 799: 797: 796: 789: 782: 774: 768: 767: 762: 756: 748: 747:External links 745: 744: 743: 711:978-1983134821 710: 689: 686: 683: 682: 671: 659: 648: 644:25 Cal. 3d 142 632: 598: 575: 574: 572: 569: 567: 564: 563: 562: 555: 552: 540:Charles Manson 527: 524: 483:Proposition 17 443:Charles Manson 434: 431: 376: 373: 304: 301: 288:In re Anderson 271: 268: 264:Proposition 17 258:that outlawed 241: 240: 226: 225: 222: 219: 218: 203: 202: 198: 197: 194: 190: 189: 186: 182: 181: 177: 176: 162:Louis H. Burke 151: 147: 146: 141: 137: 136: 132: 131: 127: 126: 122: 121: 118: 114: 113: 98: 94: 93: 89: 88: 80: 76: 75: 70: 69:Full case name 66: 65: 60: 59: 52: 44: 43: 26: 24: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1595: 1584: 1581: 1579: 1576: 1574: 1571: 1569: 1566: 1564: 1561: 1560: 1558: 1534: 1533: 1529: 1526: 1525: 1521: 1518: 1517: 1513: 1510: 1509: 1505: 1502: 1501: 1497: 1496: 1494: 1492: 1488: 1481: 1480: 1476: 1473: 1472: 1468: 1467: 1465: 1463: 1459: 1455: 1448: 1444: 1429: 1428: 1424: 1421: 1420: 1416: 1413: 1412: 1408: 1405: 1404: 1400: 1397: 1396: 1392: 1389: 1388: 1384: 1381: 1380: 1376: 1373: 1372: 1368: 1365: 1364: 1360: 1357: 1356: 1352: 1349: 1348: 1344: 1343: 1341: 1337: 1330: 1329: 1325: 1322: 1321: 1317: 1314: 1313: 1309: 1306: 1305: 1301: 1298: 1297: 1293: 1292: 1290: 1284: 1277: 1276: 1272: 1269: 1268: 1264: 1261: 1260: 1256: 1253: 1252: 1248: 1245: 1244: 1240: 1237: 1236: 1232: 1229: 1228: 1224: 1221: 1220: 1216: 1213: 1212: 1208: 1205: 1204: 1200: 1197: 1196: 1192: 1189: 1188: 1184: 1181: 1180: 1176: 1173: 1172: 1168: 1165: 1164: 1160: 1157: 1156: 1152: 1149: 1148: 1144: 1141: 1140: 1136: 1133: 1132: 1128: 1125: 1124: 1120: 1117: 1116: 1112: 1109: 1108: 1104: 1101: 1100: 1096: 1093: 1092: 1088: 1085: 1084: 1080: 1077: 1076: 1072: 1069: 1068: 1064: 1061: 1060: 1056: 1053: 1052: 1048: 1045: 1044: 1040: 1037: 1036: 1032: 1029: 1028: 1024: 1021: 1020: 1016: 1013: 1012: 1008: 1005: 1004: 1000: 997: 996: 992: 989: 988: 984: 981: 980: 976: 973: 972: 968: 965: 964: 960: 957: 956: 952: 949: 948: 944: 941: 940: 936: 935: 933: 931:Death penalty 929: 922: 921: 917: 914: 913: 909: 906: 905: 901: 898: 897: 893: 890: 889: 885: 882: 881: 877: 874: 873: 869: 866: 865: 861: 858: 857: 856:Solem v. Helm 853: 850: 849: 845: 842: 841: 837: 834: 833: 829: 828: 826: 824:Incarceration 822: 818: 811: 807: 802: 795: 790: 788: 783: 781: 776: 775: 772: 766: 763: 760: 757: 754: 751: 750: 746: 740: 733: 728:|first2= 721: 713: 707: 703: 702: 697: 692: 691: 687: 680: 675: 672: 668: 663: 660: 657: 652: 649: 646:, 189 (1978). 645: 641: 636: 633: 620: 616: 612: 608: 602: 599: 595: 591: 586: 580: 577: 570: 565: 561: 558: 557: 553: 551: 549: 545: 544:Sirhan Sirhan 541: 537: 533: 526:Documentation 525: 523: 519: 514: 512: 507: 505: 501: 500: 499:habeas corpus 495: 491: 486: 484: 477: 475: 471: 465: 463: 459: 458: 452: 451:Sirhan Sirhan 448: 447:Tate-LaBianca 444: 440: 432: 430: 428: 424: 419: 417: 416: 411: 406: 402: 398: 395: 391: 388: 387: 382: 374: 372: 368: 366: 362: 356: 354: 347: 345: 343: 337: 336:8th Amendment 332: 328: 326: 322: 317: 315: 311: 302: 300: 297: 295: 294: 289: 285: 281: 276: 269: 267: 265: 261: 257: 253: 249: 248: 238: 234: 231: 227: 223:Superseded by 220: 216: 212: 208: 204: 199: 195: 191: 187: 183: 180:Case opinions 178: 175: 171: 167: 163: 159: 155: 152: 148: 145: 142: 140:Chief Justice 138: 133: 128: 123: 119: 115: 110: 109:69 Cal.2d 613 104: 103:64 Cal.2d 633 99: 97:Prior history 95: 90: 85: 84:6 Cal. 3d 628 81: 77: 74: 71: 67: 61: 57: 56: 45: 40: 37: 33: 19: 1530: 1522: 1514: 1506: 1498: 1477: 1469: 1425: 1417: 1409: 1401: 1393: 1385: 1377: 1369: 1361: 1353: 1345: 1326: 1318: 1310: 1302: 1294: 1273: 1265: 1257: 1249: 1241: 1233: 1225: 1217: 1211:Baze v. Rees 1209: 1201: 1193: 1185: 1177: 1169: 1161: 1153: 1145: 1137: 1129: 1121: 1113: 1105: 1097: 1089: 1081: 1073: 1065: 1057: 1049: 1041: 1033: 1025: 1017: 1014:(1981, 1984) 1009: 1001: 993: 985: 977: 970: 969: 961: 953: 945: 937: 918: 910: 902: 894: 886: 878: 870: 862: 854: 846: 838: 830: 700: 688:Bibliography 674: 662: 651: 639: 635: 623:. Retrieved 619:the original 601: 584: 579: 531: 529: 521: 516: 510: 508: 497: 493: 489: 487: 479: 473: 469: 467: 462:406 U.S. 813 455: 438: 436: 426: 420: 413: 409: 404: 384: 378: 369: 360: 358: 352: 349: 341: 339: 333: 329: 318: 313: 309: 306: 298: 291: 287: 283: 277: 273: 246: 245: 244: 201:Laws applied 158:Stanley Mosk 92:Case history 72: 53: 36: 1288:or injuries 974:(Cal. 1972) 596: 1972). 548:gas chamber 310:Witherspoon 79:Citation(s) 1557:Categories 566:References 472:case that 423:initiative 270:Background 256:California 720:cite book 571:Citations 546:from the 433:Aftermath 209:§§ 4500, 803:case law 625:July 22, 554:See also 511:Anderson 470:Anderson 439:Anderson 427:Anderson 379:Justice 303:Decision 185:Majority 375:Dissent 211:1239(b) 193:Dissent 125:Holding 1535:(2023) 1527:(2019) 1519:(1998) 1511:(1993) 1503:(1989) 1482:(1987) 1474:(1951) 1430:(2024) 1422:(2020) 1414:(2011) 1406:(1994) 1398:(1993) 1390:(1991) 1382:(1989) 1374:(1976) 1366:(1968) 1358:(1962) 1350:(1958) 1331:(2002) 1323:(1992) 1315:(1977) 1278:(2019) 1270:(2019) 1262:(2017) 1254:(2016) 1246:(2016) 1238:(2015) 1230:(2014) 1222:(2008) 1214:(2008) 1206:(2007) 1198:(2006) 1190:(2006) 1182:(2006) 1166:(2005) 1158:(2004) 1150:(2002) 1142:(2002) 1134:(1993) 1126:(1990) 1118:(1990) 1110:(1989) 1102:(1989) 1094:(1988) 1086:(1988) 1078:(1988) 1070:(1987) 1062:(1986) 1054:(1986) 1046:(1985) 1038:(1985) 1030:(1984) 1022:(1982) 1006:(1980) 998:(1978) 990:(1977) 982:(1976) 966:(1972) 958:(1971) 950:(1947) 942:(1879) 923:(2021) 915:(2017) 907:(2016) 899:(2012) 891:(2010) 883:(2003) 875:(2003) 867:(1991) 859:(1983) 851:(1980) 843:(1962) 835:(1910) 708:  592: ( 588:, 490:Furman 410:per se 405:Furman 340:cruel 196:McComb 1339:Other 392: 739:link 732:help 706:ISBN 627:2017 594:Cal. 542:and 536:SWAT 494:most 437:The 394:U.S. 252:Cal. 550:." 397:238 390:408 342:and 314:was 1559:: 724:: 722:}} 718:{{ 642:, 613:. 513:: 460:, 353:or 266:. 213:; 172:, 168:, 164:, 160:, 156:, 793:e 786:t 779:v 741:) 734:) 714:. 669:. 629:. 239:) 235:( 34:. 20:)

Index

California v. Anderson
People v. Anderson (1968)
Supreme Court of California
6 Cal. 3d 628
64 Cal.2d 633
69 Cal.2d 613
Donald R. Wright
Mathew O. Tobriner
Stanley Mosk
Louis H. Burke
Raymond L. Sullivan
Raymond E. Peters
Marshall F. McComb
Cal. Penal Code
1239(b)
California Constitution
California Constitution
Article I section 27
California Proposition 17
Cal.
California
capital punishment
Proposition 17
first-degree murder
Witherspoon v. Illinois
capital punishment
cruel or unusual
8th Amendment
Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Marshall F. McComb

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.