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