holding that “[n]o reasonable hypothesis of innocence exists as to the robbery of Mr. Morgan” (emphasis in original)
How later courts described this case
- holding that “[n]o reasonable hypothesis of innocence exists as to the robbery of Mr. Morgan” (emphasis in original)
- analyzing a relative culpability claim under the heading “Proportionality,” addressing it as a claim that defendant’s sentence is “disproportionate,” and - 10 - referring to it in terms of “comparing the case to other capital cases with similar mitigating and aggravating circumstances”
- “Generally, the feasibility and scope of any reinstruction of the jury ‘resides within the discretion of the [trial] judge.’”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
CANADY, J.,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur in the affirmance of the first-degree murder, attempted first-degree murder, robbery and arson convictions, and of the sentence of death. I dissent, however, from the reversal of the attempted robbery conviction. • I would affirm that conviction.