Pinkerton v. McCotter

Pinkerton v. McCotter, Director, Texas Department of Corrections

Pinkerton v. McCotter, 476 U.S. 1109 (1986)

Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Decided: May 14, 1986
Docket: No. A-872
Judges: Brennan, Marshall, Whom
Citations: 476 U.S. 1109106 S. Ct. 196190 L. Ed. 2d 6471986 U.S. LEXIS 3002

Cited by 20 2 descriptions by later courts

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Application for stay of execution of sentence of death, presented to Justice White, and by him referred to the Court, denied.

Dissent — Brennan

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Justice Brennan,

dissenting.

Adhering to my view that the death penalty is in all circumstances cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U. S. 153, 227 (1976), I would grant the application for stay in order to give the applicant time to file a petition for writ of certiorari, and would grant the petition and vacate the sentence in this case.

Dissent — Marshall

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Justice Marshall, with whom Justice Brennan joins,

dissenting.

Applicant seeks a stay of execution, claiming that the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments are offended by the State’s attempt to execute him for a crime he committed while a juvenile. This Court has not yet considered whether imposition of the death penalty for a minor’s crimes is so antagonistic to civilized notions of morality as to transgress the bounds imposed by the Constitution. I believe it is time for this Court to address this issue of profound significance. See Roach v. Aiken, 474 U. S. 1039 (1986) (Brennan, J., joined by Marshall, J., dissenting). Accordingly, I would grant the stay of execution in order to afford Pinkerton an opportunity to present his claim in a petition for certiorari.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 2 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

(proposal requiring adherence to OMB Circular A-76 held nonnegotiable)

U.S. Dep't Of Health & Human Servs. v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 822 F.2d 430 (4th Cir. 1987)

Cited by 20 cases

View all citing references →

Relies on it most ⓘ

U.S. Department of Health & Human Services v. Federal Labor Relations Authority844 F.2d 1087 (4th Cir. 1988)
Commonwealth v. Aulisio522 A.2d 1075 (Pa. 1987)
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services v. Federal Labor Relations Authority822 F.2d 430 (4th Cir. 1987)
U.S. Department Of Health And Human Services v. Federal Labor Relations Authority822 F.2d 430 (4th Cir. 1987)
Saldana v. State846 P.2d 604 (Wyo. 1993)
Guinn v. Church of Christ of Collinsville1989 OK 8, 775 P.2d 766

Most recent

Conner v. BOARD OF COUNTY COM'RS, NATRONA2002 WY 148, 54 P.3d 1274
Snake River Brewing Co. v. Town of Jackson2002 WY 11, 39 P.3d 397
Rissler & McMurry Co. v. State917 P.2d 1157 (Wyo. 1996)
Saldana v. State846 P.2d 604 (Wyo. 1993)
Johnson v. State Hearing Examiner's Office838 P.2d 158 (Wyo. 1992)
V-1 Oil Co. v. City of Rock Springs823 P.2d 1176 (Wyo. 1991)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

Depth	Case	Cited by
	Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976)	6,081
	Roach v. Aiken, 474 U.S. 1039 (1986)	7

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list