⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Ninth Circuit considers a murder sentence and expert mental-health evidence the jury never received. Ray Azcarate was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life without parole. Jurors heard about a warning to the victim and efforts to clean up afterward, alongside evidence of drug use and delusions. His lawyer presented no supporting expert evidence at sentencing, although a psychological report described a drug-related disorder and improvement with treatment. The evaluations concerned competence to stand trial, not directly his mental state during the killing. A federal judge later ordered a new penalty hearing, finding a reasonable probability that the missing evidence would have led to a lower sentence. Nevada challenges that ruling; Azcarate also challenges evidence of earlier misconduct used at his trial. Mitigation means evidence supporting a less severe punishment, not a finding of innocence. His lawyer will defend the new hearing; Nevada will argue that the reports do not establish the required likelihood of a different sentence.

Azcarate v. Williams, et al. (No. 24-3174) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued October 27, 2026.