| Litigants: | Schad v. Arizona |
| Arguedate: | February 27 |
| Argueyear: | 1991 |
| Decidedate: | June 21 |
| Decideyear: | 1991 |
| Fullname: | Schad v. State of Arizona |
| Usvol: | 501 |
| Uspage: | 624 |
| Parallelcitations: | 111 S. Ct. 2491; 115 L. Ed. 2d 555 |
| Prior: | State v. Schad, 163 Ariz. 411, 788 P.2d 1162 (1989); cert. granted, . |
| Holding: | (1) Robbery is not a lesser included offense of felony murder predicated on robbery, and so Beck v. Alabama does not require a jury instruction on robbery when a defendant is charged with felony murder. (2) Because jurors need not agree on the mode of commission of an offense, Arizona may classify both premeditated murder and felony murder as first-degree murder and require that jurors unanimously agree only that first-degree murder was committed, rather than that felony murder or premeditated murder was committed. |
| Majority: | Souter |
| Joinmajority: | Rehnquist, O'Connor, Kennedy (in full); Scalia (part III) |
| Concurrence: | Scalia |
| Dissent: | White |
| Joindissent: | Marshall, Blackmun, Stevens |
| Lawsapplied: | U.S. Const. amends. VI, XIV |
Schad v. Arizona, 501 U.S. 624 (1991), is a United States Supreme Court decision that explained which charges need to be explained to the jury in trials for felony murders.