This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.
In brief
Overview
According to Andrew D. Hurwitz, the petition argues that the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial requires a jury to find any fact that could increase a defendant’s sentence, as established in *Apprendi v. New Jersey*.
According to Andrew D. Hurwitz, arizona law permits a death sentence only if the jury’s verdict alone supports life imprisonment; the judge has no discretion to impose death.
According to Mr. Hurwitz, the petitioner further contends that while a jury sentencing recommendation is not required, a jury finding of aggravating facts is necessary.
Background and question before the Court
According to Mr. Hurwitz, determining which homicide defendants are most culpable and eligible for the death penalty requires a narrowing process that identifies aggravating factors.
What each side argues
Petitioner Position
According to Andrew D. Hurwitz, the petitioner relies on *Apprendi* to argue that any fact increasing the penalty must be found by a jury.
According to Mr. Hurwitz, the petitioner asserts that a jury must find the aggravating facts that make a death sentence possible.
According to Mr. Hurwitz, identifying the most culpable homicide defendants for death penalty eligibility requires a narrowing process that isolates aggravating circumstances.
Respondent Position
According to Andrew D. Hurwitz, arizona law provides that a defendant convicted of first‑degree murder may be sentenced, based solely on the jury verdict, only to life imprisonment; the judge lacks authority to impose death.
What happened at oral argument
According to Justice Scalia, justice Scalia questioned whether the petitioner was entitled to a finding of aggravation rather than mitigation.
A Justice asked whether Florida advisory‑jury findings that would make a defendant eligible for death are covered by this case.
According to Justice, a Justice inquired whether a judge’s requirement that the jury accompany its recommendation with a factual finding of aggravating circumstance would bring the case within this decision.
What the Court decided
Why it matters
Terms to know
No glossary terms are available for this guide.
Primary sources
Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.
- 0a00fa3434fda043cbb6-r1-3fdafb0fa4d25aaf.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 19, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.