Schad v. Arizona, No. 90-5551 (U.S. Supreme Court) (501 U.S. 624; 111 S.Ct. 2491) (June 21, 1991) (Justice Souter)
In this case, a four-Justice plurality concluded that when a statute enumerates alternative routes for its violation, whether jurors must be unanimous with respect to a particular route depends on two questions. First, did the legislature intend the different routes to establish separate "offenses," for which unanimity is required as …
Full article and associated cases available to subscribers.
As a digital subscriber to Punch and Jurists, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login