Bush v. Sharp
In brief
The Supreme Court refused to hear Bush's case, so it did not rule on whether serious state offenses require unanimous jury verdicts.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided · May 18, 2020
- What it’s about
- The Court held that the Sixth Amendment requires a unanimous jury verdict to convict a person of a serious offense in state court. The ruling favored Bush and rejected the use of a nonunanimous verdict to support the conviction.
- Who it affects
- Bush received no Supreme Court ruling on his challenge, and this case set no rule for state courts on unanimous verdicts.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The case came from the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit through a petition asking the Supreme Court to take it.
Question presented
Whether the Sixth Amendment’s right to a jury trial—as applied to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment—requires a unanimous jury verdict to support a conviction for a serious offense?
What the Court decided
Holding
Petition DENIED.
What's next
The Court has finished this docket action. No further Supreme Court step is identified, and this case contains no ruling on the legal question.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
Show 7 moreShow fewer
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.