Strickland v. Washington

Holding that ineffective assistance of counsel requires two showings: one, that "counsel's performance was deficient," and two, that "the deficient performance prejudiced the defense"

Apprendi v. New Jersey

Holding that “[o]ther than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt”

Blakely v. Washington

Holding that “[w]hen a judge inflicts punishment that the jury's verdict alone does not allow, the jury has not found all the facts ‘which the law makes essential to the punishment,’ and the judge exceeds his proper authority”

Jackson v. Virginia

Holding that courts conducting review of the sufficiency of the evidence to support a criminal conviction should view the "evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution"

Sandin v. Conner

Holding that liberty interests requiring procedural due process are limited to freedom from restraints that impose "atypical and significant hardship" as compared to ordinary prison life

Estelle v. McGuire

Holding habeas review only looks to whether "the admission of the evidence violated [defendant]'s constitutional rights" and not state law questions

Wiggins v. Smith

Holding that counsel's performance was deficient when they failed to expand their investigation into the defendant's life history "after having acquired only rudimentary knowledge of his history from a narrow set of sources," especially when those sources indicated the existence of helpful mitigation evidence

Batson v. Kentucky

Holding that the Equal Protection Clause applies to the use of peremptory strikes

Tennard v. Dretke

Holding that petitioner was entitled to a COA on his Penry claim where his evidence of low IQ and impaired intellectual functioning had "mitigating dimension beyond the impact it has on the individual's ability to act deliberately"

Village of Willowbrook v. Olech

Holding that a class of one could challenge different treatment under the Equal Protection Clause where treatment was alleged to be "irrational and wholly arbitrary"

Section 848 - Continuing criminal enterprise

Recognizing the court's authority in certain situations to "impose a sentence, other than death, authorized by law"

Section 15

Affording “the right ... to compel attendance of witnesses in the defendant's behalf”

Section 37.07 - Verdict Must Be General; Separate Hearing On Proper Punishment

Concluding that "[r]egardless of the plea and whether the punishment be assessed by the judge or the jury, evidence may be offered by the state and the defendant as to any matter the court deems relevant to sentencing, including but not limited to the prior criminal record of the defendant, his general reputation, his character, an opinion regarding his character, the circumstances of the offense for which he is being tried"

Section 2C:11-3 - Murder

Requiring courts to either sentence juvenile homicide offenders to 30 years without parole or to make them eligible for parole after 30 years

Section 7

Guaranteeing due process and equal protection

Section 16

Stating that the right to a "trial by jury is an inviolate right"

Section 17

Prohibiting cruel or unusual punishment

Section 2929.04 - Death penalty or imprisonment - aggravating and mitigating factors

Stating that the jury is to weigh against the aggravating circumstances, inter alia, "the nature and circumstances of the offense, the history, character, and background of the offender"

Section 37.071 - Procedure In Capital Case

Identifying "special issues" to be considered by the sentencer when determining the appropriate sentence

Section 9711 - Sentencing procedure for murder of the first degree

Holding that the victim's statements about the defendant that were communicated to the defendant were not hearsay when the statements were offered to prove the defendant's motive for killing the victim

Rule 4.421 - Circumstances in aggravation

Rule 4.420 - Selection of term of imprisonment for offense