2026-05-25T01:21:24Zhttps://keep.lib.asu.edu/oai/request

oai:keep.lib.asu.edu:node-1483542024-12-19T19:04:43Zoai_pmh:alloai_pmh:repo_items

148354 https://hdl.handle.net/2286/R.I.63336 http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ 2021-05 31 pages eng Caldwell, Rachel Lillian Hoekstra, Valerie Bender, Paul Historical, Philosophical & Religious Studies School of Social Transformation School of Social Transformation Historical, Philosophical & Religious Studies, Sch School of Politics and Global Studies Barrett, The Honors College Text The United States Supreme Court decided Ramos v. Louisiana in 2020, requiring all states to convict criminal defendants by a unanimous jury. However, this case only applied to petitioners on direct, and not collateral, appeal. In this thesis, I argue that the Ramos precedent should apply to people on collateral appeal as well, exploring the implications of such a decision and the criteria that should be used to make the decision in the case before the court, Edwards v. Vannoy (2021). Ultimately, I find that because the criteria currently used to determine retroactivity of new criminal precedents does not provide a clear answer to the question posed in Edwards, the Court should give more weight to the defendant's freedoms pursuant to the presumption of innocence while considering the potential for any disastrous outcomes. Supreme Court Constitution Criminal Justice Law Appeals The Retroactive Application of Ramos