turner
murray
argued
december
decided
april
petitioner
black
man
indicted
virginia
charges
capital
murder
fatally
shooting
white
proprietor
jewelry
store
course
robbery
voir
dire
state
trial
judge
refused
petitioner
request
question
prospective
jurors
racial
prejudice
jury
convicted
petitioner
separate
sentencing
hearing
recommended
sentenced
death
recommendation
trial
judge
accepted
virginia
upheld
death
sentence
rejecting
petitioner
argument
trial
judge
deprived
fair
trial
refusing
question
prospective
jurors
racial
prejudice
petitioner
sought
habeas
corpus
relief
federal
district
rejected
argument
denied
relief
appeals
affirmed
held
judgment
reversed
case
remanded
reversed
remanded
justice
white
delivered
opinion
respect
parts
iii
concluding
defendant
accused
interracial
capital
crime
entitled
prospective
jurors
informed
victim
race
questioned
issue
racial
bias
rule
minimally
intrusive
cases
involving
special
circumstances
trial
judge
retains
discretion
form
number
questions
including
whether
question
venire
individually
collectively
also
defendant
complain
failure
question
venire
racial
prejudice
unless
specifically
requested
inquiry
pp
justice
white
joined
justice
blackmun
justice
stevens
justice
concluded
parts
ii
iv
risk
racial
prejudice
may
infected
petitioner
capital
sentencing
unacceptable
light
ease
risk
especially
serious
view
finality
death
sentence
minimized
ristaino
ross
distinguished
pp
necessary
petitioner
retried
issue
guilt
unacceptable
risk
racial
prejudice
infecting
capital
sentencing
proceeding
inadequacy
voir
dire
requires
death
sentence
vacated
unacceptable
risk
arose
conjunction
three
factors
fact
crime
charged
involved
interracial
violence
broad
discretion
given
jury
virginia
law
sentencing
hearing
special
seriousness
risk
improper
sentencing
capital
case
pp
lloyd
snook
iii
appointment
argued
cause
filed
briefs
petitioner
james
kulp
senior
assistant
attorney
general
virginia
argued
cause
respondent
brief
william
broaddus
attorney
general
robert
anderson
iii
assistant
attorney
general
justice
white
announced
judgment
delivered
opinion
respect
parts
iii
opinion
respect
parts
ii
iv
justice
blackmun
justice
stevens
justice
join
petitioner
black
man
sentenced
death
murder
white
storekeeper
question
presented
whether
trial
judge
committed
reversible
error
voir
dire
refusing
petitioner
request
question
prospective
jurors
racial
prejudice
july
petitioner
entered
jewelry
store
franklin
virginia
armed
shotgun
demanded
proprietor
jack
smith
put
jewelry
money
cash
register
jewelry
bags
smith
complied
petitioner
demand
triggered
silent
alarm
alerting
police
department
alan
bain
police
officer
arrived
inquire
alarm
petitioner
surprised
forced
surrender
revolver
learned
smith
triggered
silent
alarm
petitioner
became
agitated
fired
toward
rear
wall
store
stated
saw
heard
police
officers
going
start
killing
store
police
siren
sounded
petitioner
walked
smith
stationed
behind
counter
without
warning
shot
head
bain
pistol
wounding
smith
causing
slump
incapacitated
floor
officer
bain
attempted
calm
petitioner
promising
take
anywhere
wanted
go
asking
shoot
petitioner
angrily
replied
going
kill
smith
snitching
fired
two
pistol
shots
smith
chest
fatally
wounding
petitioner
turned
away
shooting
smith
bain
able
disarm
place
arrest
southampton
county
virginia
grand
jury
indicted
petitioner
charges
capital
murder
use
firearm
commission
murder
possession
shotgun
commission
robbery
petitioner
requested
granted
change
venue
northampton
county
virginia
rural
county
miles
location
murder
prior
commencement
voir
dire
petitioner
counsel
submitted
trial
judge
list
proposed
questions
including
following
defendant
willie
lloyd
turner
member
negro
race
victim
jack
smith
white
caucasian
facts
prejudice
willie
lloyd
turner
affect
ability
render
fair
impartial
verdict
based
solely
evidence
turner
commonwealth
jury
empaneled
consisted
eight
whites
four
blacks
convicted
petitioner
charges
addendum
separate
sentencing
hearing
capital
charge
jury
recommended
petitioner
sentenced
death
recommendation
trial
judge
accepted
petitioner
appealed
death
sentence
virginia
among
points
argued
trial
judge
deprived
constitutional
right
fair
impartial
jury
refusing
question
prospective
jurors
racial
prejudice
virginia
rejected
argument
relying
decision
ristaino
ross
stated
trial
judge
refusal
ask
prospective
jurors
racial
attitudes
perhaps
wisest
decision
matter
policy
constitutionally
objectionable
absence
factors
akin
ham
south
carolina
turner
commonwealth
supra
held
mere
fact
defendant
black
victim
white
constitutionally
mandate
inquiry
racial
prejudice
ibid
failed
direct
appeal
petitioner
sought
habeas
corpus
relief
federal
district
eastern
district
virginia
app
argued
without
success
trial
judge
refusal
ask
prospective
jurors
racial
attitudes
deprived
right
fair
trial
district
noted
ristaino
supra
involved
crime
interracial
violence
held
inquiry
racial
prejudice
voir
dire
constitutionally
required
facts
case
suggest
significant
likelihood
racial
prejudice
might
infect
defendant
trial
app
quoting
found
present
case
like
ristaino
unlike
ham
racial
issues
inextricably
bound
facts
trial
app
appeals
fourth
circuit
affirmed
district
denial
habeas
corpus
relief
petitioner
turner
bass
like
virginia
district
fourth
circuit
found
special
circumstances
case
analogous
ham
rejected
idea
nature
crime
punishment
special
circumstance
relying
ristaino
likewise
found
special
circumstance
fact
petitioner
black
victim
white
granted
certiorari
review
fourth
circuit
decision
petitioner
constitutionally
entitled
potential
jurors
questioned
concerning
racial
prejudice
reverse
ii
fourth
circuit
opinion
correctly
analytical
framework
evaluating
petitioner
argument
broad
inquiry
case
must
whether
circumstances
presented
constitutionally
significant
likelihood
absent
questioning
racial
prejudice
jurors
indifferent
stand
unsworne
internal
quotation
omitted
fourth
circuit
correct
holding
ristaino
mere
fact
petitioner
black
victim
white
constitute
special
circumstance
constitutional
proportions
sets
case
apart
ristaino
however
addition
petitioner
accused
crime
white
victim
crime
charged
capital
offense
capital
sentencing
proceeding
jury
jury
called
upon
make
highly
subjective
unique
individualized
judgment
regarding
punishment
particular
person
deserves
caldwell
mississippi
quoting
zant
stephens
rehnquist
concurring
judgment
virginia
statute
petitioner
sentenced
instructive
kinds
judgments
capital
sentencing
jury
must
make
first
order
consider
death
penalty
virginia
jury
must
find
either
defendant
likely
commit
future
violent
crimes
crime
outrageously
wantonly
vile
horrible
inhuman
involved
torture
depravity
mind
aggravated
battery
victim
code
second
jury
must
consider
mitigating
evidence
offered
defendant
mitigating
evidence
may
include
limited
facts
tending
show
defendant
acted
influence
extreme
emotional
mental
disturbance
time
crime
defendant
capacity
appreciate
criminality
conduct
conform
conduct
requirements
law
significantly
impaired
finally
even
jury
found
aggravating
factor
irrespective
whether
mitigating
evidence
offered
jury
discretion
recommend
death
sentence
case
may
imposed
virginia
statute
gives
jury
greater
discretion
systems
upheld
constitutional
challenge
see
jurek
texas
however
cases
establish
every
capital
sentencer
must
free
weigh
relevant
mitigating
evidence
deciding
whether
impose
death
penalty
see
eddings
oklahoma
lockett
ohio
plurality
opinion
end
jury
must
make
difficult
individualized
judgment
whether
defendant
deserves
sentence
death
range
discretion
entrusted
jury
capital
sentencing
hearing
unique
opportunity
racial
prejudice
operate
remain
undetected
facts
case
juror
believes
blacks
violence
prone
morally
inferior
might
well
influenced
belief
deciding
whether
petitioner
crime
involved
aggravating
factors
specified
virginia
law
juror
might
also
less
favorably
inclined
toward
petitioner
evidence
mental
disturbance
mitigating
circumstance
subtle
less
consciously
held
racial
attitudes
also
influence
juror
decision
case
fear
blacks
easily
stirred
violent
facts
petitioner
crime
might
incline
juror
favor
death
penalty
risk
racial
prejudice
infecting
capital
sentencing
proceeding
especially
serious
light
complete
finality
death
sentence
well
separate
opinions
majority
individual
justices
recognized
qualitative
difference
death
punishments
requires
correspondingly
greater
degree
scrutiny
capital
sentencing
determination
california
ramos
struck
capital
sentences
found
circumstances
imposed
created
unacceptable
risk
death
penalty
may
meted
arbitrarily
capriciously
whim
mistake
caldwell
supra
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
citation
omitted
present
case
find
risk
racial
prejudice
may
infected
petitioner
capital
sentencing
unacceptable
light
ease
risk
minimized
refusing
question
prospective
jurors
racial
prejudice
trial
judge
failed
adequately
protect
petitioner
constitutional
right
impartial
jury
iii
hold
capital
defendant
accused
interracial
crime
entitled
prospective
jurors
informed
race
victim
questioned
issue
racial
bias
rule
propose
minimally
intrusive
cases
involving
special
circumstances
trial
judge
retains
discretion
form
number
questions
subject
including
decision
whether
question
venire
individually
collectively
see
ham
south
carolina
also
defendant
complain
judge
failure
question
venire
racial
prejudice
unless
defendant
specifically
requested
inquiry
iv
inadequacy
voir
dire
case
requires
petitioner
death
sentence
vacated
necessary
however
retried
issue
guilt
judgment
case
unacceptable
risk
racial
prejudice
infecting
capital
sentencing
proceeding
judgment
based
conjunction
three
factors
fact
crime
charged
involved
interracial
violence
broad
discretion
given
jury
hearing
special
seriousness
risk
improper
sentencing
capital
case
guilt
phase
petitioner
trial
jury
greater
discretion
crime
charged
noncapital
murder
thus
respect
guilt
phase
petitioner
trial
find
case
indistinguishable
ristaino
continue
adhere
see
supra
judgment
appeals
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
footnotes
whether
trial
judge
referring
decision
ristaino
ross
decision
virginia
unclear
ham
young
black
man
known
small
south
carolina
hometown
civil
rights
activist
arrested
charged
possession
marijuana
held
trial
judge
committed
reversible
error
refusing
honor
ham
request
question
prospective
jurors
racial
prejudice
ristaino
supra
specified
factors
mandated
inquiry
racial
prejudice
ham
ham
defense
framed
civil
rights
activities
prominence
community
civil
rights
activist
already
known
veniremen
inevitably
revealed
members
jury
course
presentation
defense
racial
issues
therefore
inextricably
bound
conduct
trial
ham
reputation
civil
rights
activist
defense
interposed
likely
intensify
prejudice
individual
members
jury
might
harbor
also
rejected
petitioner
reliance
statistical
study
showing
black
defendants
kill
white
victims
sentenced
death
disproportionate
frequency
stated
study
based
statistics
compiled
little
utility
establishing
potential
racial
prejudice
virginia
ristaino
defendant
one
three
black
men
charged
assaulting
white
security
guard
intent
murder
assault
occurred
course
robbery
suggestion
special
circumstance
black
murderers
whose
victims
white
executed
disproportionate
frequency
responded
quoting
opinion
proposition
constitutional
presumption
juror
bias
members
particular
racial
ethnic
groups
quoting
referring
facts
petitioner
crime
retreat
holding
ristaino
fact
interracial
violence
alone
special
circumstance
entitling
defendant
prospective
jurors
questioned
racial
prejudice
clear
though
holding
ristaino
based
blind
belief
facts
presented
case
evoke
racial
prejudice
stated
remains
unfortunate
fact
society
violent
crimes
perpetrated
members
racial
ethnic
groups
often
raise
reasonable
possibility
racial
prejudice
influence
jury
ristaino
condone
possibility
simply
leaves
trial
judge
discretion
decide
measures
take
screening
racial
prejudice
absent
showing
significant
likelihood
racial
prejudice
might
infect
trial
justice
powell
dissent
takes
issue
terms
singularly
unwise
unjustified
presumption
capital
jurors
harbor
latent
racial
bias
post
remark
fails
distinguish
recognition
jurors
capital
case
may
harbor
racial
bias
presumption
make
particular
capital
jurors
fact
racially
prejudiced
justice
powell
implicitly
recognizes
distinction
suits
purposes
thus
say
case
like
ham
south
carolina
jurors
presumed
prejudiced
rather
unacceptable
risk
racial
prejudice
distort
trial
post
rhetoric
put
aside
plain
risk
racial
prejudice
influencing
jury
whenever
crime
involving
interracial
violence
see
supra
question
point
risk
becomes
constitutionally
unacceptable
notwithstanding
justice
powell
attempt
minimize
significance
discretion
entrusted
jury
capital
sentencing
hearing
post
convinced
discretion
gives
greater
opportunity
racial
prejudice
operate
present
jury
restricted
factfinding
together
special
seriousness
view
risk
racial
prejudice
influencing
capital
sentencing
decision
distinguishes
case
ristaino
right
impartial
jury
guaranteed
sixth
amendment
made
applicable
fourteenth
amendment
principles
due
process
ristaino
justice
powell
contends
inquiry
racial
prejudice
absence
circumstances
make
clear
need
well
negative
effect
suggesting
jurors
race
somehow
relevant
case
post
whether
concern
purely
chimerical
decision
leave
capital
defendant
counsel
defendant
counsel
decline
request
voir
dire
subject
racial
prejudice
way
require
suggest
judge
broach
topic
sua
sponte
find
unnecessary
evaluate
statistical
studies
petitioner
introduced
support
proposition
black
defendants
kill
whites
executed
disproportionate
frequency
justice
brennan
incorrectly
reads
opinion
suggestion
constitutional
entitlement
impartial
jury
attaches
sentencing
phase
post
real
question
whether
constitutional
right
impartial
jury
throughout
criminal
trial
see
supra
prophylactic
rules
constitution
imposes
furtherance
right
held
ristaino
reaffirm
today
absent
special
circumstances
create
particularly
compelling
need
inquire
racial
prejudice
constitution
leaves
conduct
voir
dire
sound
discretion
state
trial
judges
implication
justice
brennan
opinion
every
crime
interracial
violence
special
circumstance
justice
brennan
dissent
however
ristaino
squarely
rejected
approach
moreover
unpersuaded
justice
brennan
view
opportunity
racial
bias
taint
jury
process
equally
factor
guilt
sentencing
phase
bifurcated
capital
trial
post
see
risk
racial
bias
sentencing
hearings
entirely
different
order
decisions
sentencing
jurors
must
make
involve
far
subjective
judgments
deciding
guilt
innocence
justice
brennan
concurring
part
dissenting
part
judgment
vacates
petitioner
sentence
death
refusing
disturb
conviction
adhering
view
death
penalty
circumstances
cruel
unusual
punishment
prohibited
eighth
fourteenth
amendments
gregg
georgia
brennan
dissenting
agree
death
sentence
case
must
vacated
even
hold
view
still
find
sentence
unconstitutionally
imposed
case
view
constitutional
right
defendant
trial
judge
ask
members
venire
questions
concerning
possible
racial
bias
triggered
whenever
violent
interracial
crime
committed
see
ross
massachusetts
marshall
dissenting
denial
certiorari
reality
race
relations
country
simply
may
presume
impartiality
risk
bias
runs
especially
high
members
community
serving
jury
confronted
disturbing
evidence
criminal
conduct
often
terrifying
abhorrent
analyzing
question
constitution
requires
trial
judges
accommodate
defendants
requests
inquiries
racial
prejudice
like
influenced
correctly
describes
ease
risk
may
minimized
ante
event
fully
join
either
judgment
opinion
view
decision
case
although
clearly
half
right
even
clearly
half
wrong
recognizing
constitutional
guarantee
impartial
jury
entitles
defendant
capital
case
involving
interracial
violence
prospective
jurors
questioned
issue
racial
bias
holding
requires
case
reversed
remanded
new
sentencing
disavows
logic
reasoning
denying
petitioner
turner
new
trial
issue
guilt
accomplishes
postulating
jury
role
sentencing
phase
capital
trial
fundamentally
different
jury
function
guilt
phase
concluding
former
gives
rise
significantly
greater
risk
verdict
tainted
racism
believe
analysis
improperly
intertwines
significance
risk
bias
consequences
bias
view
distinction
jury
role
guilt
trial
role
sentencing
hearing
distinction
without
substance
far
juror
bias
concerned
join
portion
judgment
granting
petitioner
new
sentencing
proceeding
dissent
portion
judgment
refusing
vacate
conviction
sixth
amendment
guarantees
criminal
defendants
impartial
jury
mere
exhortation
noted
right
impartial
jury
carries
concomitant
right
take
reasonable
steps
designed
insure
jury
impartial
ham
south
carolina
marshall
concurring
part
dissenting
part
among
important
means
designed
insure
impartial
jury
right
strike
jurors
manifest
inability
try
case
solely
basis
evidence
right
exclude
incompetent
jurors
exercised
meaningfully
effectively
unless
counsel
sufficient
information
evaluate
members
venire
justice
white
noted
lack
adequate
voir
dire
impairs
defendant
right
exercise
peremptory
challenges
provided
statute
rule
federal
courts
omitted
recognizing
fact
held
long
ago
essential
demands
fairness
may
require
judge
ask
jurors
whether
entertain
racial
prejudice
aldridge
see
also
ham
south
carolina
recently
attempted
refine
analysis
declared
showing
likelihood
racial
ethnic
prejudice
may
affect
jurors
constitution
requires
trial
judge
honor
defendant
request
examine
jurors
ability
deal
impartially
evidence
adduced
trial
supra
exercising
supervisory
powers
federal
courts
held
violent
crime
committed
victim
accused
different
races
per
se
inference
reasonable
possibility
prejudice
shown
present
case
deal
criminal
case
state
involving
act
interracial
violence
faced
question
factors
circumstances
elevate
presumptive
reasonable
possibility
prejudice
constitutionally
significant
likelihood
prejudice
identifies
three
factors
conjunction
view
entitled
petitioner
turner
matter
constitutional
right
jury
questioned
racial
bias
fact
crime
committed
involved
interracial
violence
broad
discretion
given
jury
death
penalty
hearing
special
seriousness
risk
improper
sentencing
capital
case
ante
agree
three
factors
present
petitioner
sentencing
hearing
trial
commits
constitutional
error
refusing
defense
request
ask
jurors
race
either
victim
accused
bear
ability
render
decision
based
solely
evidence
accept
judge
released
obligation
insure
impartial
jury
put
another
way
defendant
stripped
constitutional
safeguard
capital
jury
hearing
evidence
concerning
crime
involving
interracial
violence
passing
issue
rather
appropriate
sentence
argument
simply
untenable
face
best
understand
thesis
since
greater
discretion
entrusted
capital
jury
sentencing
phase
guilt
phase
sentencing
hearing
unique
opportunity
racial
prejudice
operate
remain
undetected
ante
however
discussion
issues
demonstrates
opportunity
racial
bias
taint
jury
process
uniquely
present
sentencing
hearing
equally
factor
guilt
phase
bifurcated
capital
trial
according
prejudiced
juror
sitting
sentencing
hearing
might
influenced
racial
bias
deciding
whether
crime
committed
involved
aggravating
factors
specified
state
law
notes
racial
prejudice
might
similarly
cause
juror
less
favorably
inclined
toward
accused
evidence
mitigating
circumstances
moreover
informs
us
subtle
less
consciously
held
racial
attitudes
also
influence
juror
decision
fear
blacks
easily
stirred
violent
facts
crime
might
incline
juror
favor
death
penalty
ibid
trial
determine
guilt
innocence
bottom
nothing
sum
total
countless
number
small
discretionary
decisions
made
individual
sits
jury
box
difference
conviction
acquittal
turns
whether
key
testimony
believed
rejected
whether
alibi
sounds
plausible
dubious
whether
character
witness
appears
trustworthy
unsavory
whether
jury
concludes
defendant
motive
inclination
means
available
commit
crime
charged
racially
biased
juror
sits
blurred
vision
impaired
sensibilities
incapable
fairly
making
myriad
decisions
juror
called
upon
make
course
trial
put
simply
judge
prejudged
equally
true
trial
guilt
hearing
sentencing
sentence
individual
death
basis
proceeding
tainted
racial
bias
violate
basic
values
criminal
justice
system
understands
seems
comprehend
permit
individual
convicted
prejudiced
jury
violates
values
precisely
way
incongruity
split
judgment
made
apparent
appreciated
opportunity
bias
poison
decisionmaking
operates
guilt
trial
way
sentencing
hearing
one
returns
context
case
us
implicit
judgment
acknowledgment
likelihood
jury
pronounced
death
sentence
acted
part
basis
racial
prejudice
exact
jury
convicted
turner
really
mean
suggest
constitutional
entitlement
impartial
jury
attaches
sentencing
phase
really
believe
racial
biases
turned
course
one
criminal
prosecution
sense
confused
consequences
unfair
trial
risk
jury
acting
basis
prejudice
words
suspect
really
animating
judgment
sense
outrage
rightly
experiences
prospect
man
sentenced
death
basis
color
skin
perhaps
slightly
less
troubled
prospect
racially
motivated
conviction
unaccompanied
death
penalty
suppose
unimaginable
reason
choose
two
cases
rectify
one
remedy
case
death
imposed
need
choose
two
cases
state
seems
obvious
constitutional
right
implicated
right
judged
impartial
jury
regardless
sentence
constitutional
focus
thus
belongs
whether
likelihood
bias
flows
bias
ham
south
carolina
reversed
conviction
young
black
man
charged
convicted
possession
marijuana
man
known
community
civil
rights
activist
persuaded
racial
issues
inextricably
bound
conduct
trial
concluded
likely
prejudice
individual
members
jury
might
harbor
intensified
held
circumstances
trial
judge
required
oblige
defense
request
inquire
jury
possible
racial
bias
reject
petitioner
claim
case
sentenced
months
imprisonment
surely
one
right
impartial
jury
whether
one
subject
punishment
day
lifetime
may
believe
solomonic
splitting
difference
case
granting
petitioner
new
sentencing
hearing
denying
half
relief
demanded
starkly
put
petitioner
wins
gets
resentenced
state
wins
lose
conviction
king
solomon
fact
split
baby
two
done
suspect
remembered
less
wisdom
hardheartedness
justice
served
compromising
principles
way
reverse
conviction
well
sentence
case
insure
compliance
constitutional
guarantee
impartial
jury
justice
marshall
justice
brennan
joins
concurring
judgment
part
dissenting
part
reasons
stated
opinion
ross
massachusetts
dissenting
denial
certiorari
believe
criminal
defendant
entitled
inquire
voir
dire
potential
racial
bias
jurors
whenever
case
involves
violent
interracial
crime
concedes
plain
risk
racial
prejudice
influencing
jury
whenever
crime
involving
interracial
violence
ante
mind
risk
plainly
outweighs
slight
cost
allowing
defendant
choose
whether
make
inquiry
concerning
possible
prejudice
identify
ristaino
ross
identify
today
additional
burdens
accompany
rule
therefore
agree
continuing
rejection
simple
prophylactic
rule
proposed
ristaino
even
agreed
per
se
rule
permitting
inquiry
racial
bias
appropriate
capital
cases
accept
failure
remedy
denial
inquiry
capital
case
reversing
petitioner
conviction
henceforth
capital
defendant
accused
interracial
crime
may
inquire
racial
prejudice
voir
dire
jury
sits
guilt
phase
penalty
phase
defendants
assured
impartial
jury
phases
yet
petitioner
forced
accept
conviction
may
biased
jury
incongruous
fundamentally
unfair
result
therefore
concur
judgment
vacating
petitioner
sentence
dissent
refusal
reverse
conviction
well
justice
powell
justice
rehnquist
joins
dissenting
today
adopts
per
se
rule
applicable
capital
cases
capital
defendant
accused
interracial
crime
entitled
prospective
jurors
informed
race
victim
questioned
issue
racial
bias
ante
rule
certain
add
already
heavy
burden
habeas
petitions
filed
prisoners
sentence
death
without
affording
real
protection
beyond
provided
decisions
ham
south
carolina
ristaino
ross
effect
recognizes
presumption
jurors
sworn
decide
case
impartially
nevertheless
racially
biased
presumption
flatly
contrary
decisions
ristaino
ross
supra
facts
case
demonstrate
unnecessary
unwise
rule
matter
constitutional
law
trial
judge
always
must
inquire
racial
bias
capital
case
involving
interracial
murder
rather
leaving
decision
made
basis
today
facts
defendant
black
victim
white
insufficient
raise
constitutionally
significant
likelihood
absent
questioning
racial
prejudice
impartial
jury
seated
ristaino
ross
supra
nothing
record
suggests
racial
bias
played
role
jurors
deliberations
relevant
circumstances
merit
emphasis
demonstrate
fact
interracial
murder
create
substantial
likelihood
racial
issues
expected
distort
capital
sentencing
trials
without
evidence
race
expected
factor
trials
justification
departing
rule
ham
ristaino
petitioner
committed
murder
course
armed
robbery
jewelry
store
franklin
virginia
murder
brutal
petitioner
shot
store
proprietor
three
times
first
shot
kill
caused
victim
fall
helplessly
floor
bleeding
scalp
wound
police
officer
arrived
answer
silent
alarm
pleaded
petitioner
shoot
petitioner
fired
two
shots
victim
chest
causing
death
officer
managed
subdue
arrest
petitioner
trial
evidence
petitioner
guilt
conclusive
local
media
gave
murder
extensive
publicity
petitioner
requested
granted
change
venue
southampton
county
northampton
county
across
chesapeake
bay
miles
away
location
murder
member
jury
empaneled
read
heard
murder
virginia
law
vests
trial
judge
responsibility
conduct
voir
dire
examination
prospective
jurors
turner
commonwealth
cert
denied
ordinarily
judge
rather
counsel
questions
members
venire
provide
basis
exercise
challenges
case
accordance
state
practice
judge
permitted
parties
propose
questions
asked
voir
dire
counsel
petitioner
submitted
questions
question
list
counsel
requested
following
defendant
willie
lloyd
turner
member
negro
race
victim
jack
smith
white
caucasian
facts
prejudice
willie
lloyd
turner
affect
ability
render
fair
impartial
verdict
based
solely
evidence
trial
judge
declined
ask
proposed
question
ask
general
questions
designed
uncover
bias
example
prospective
jurors
asked
know
reason
whatsoever
render
fair
impartial
verdict
case
either
defendant
commonwealth
virginia
juror
responded
negatively
jury
persons
ultimately
empaneled
included
black
citizens
black
juror
selected
act
foreman
nothing
record
trial
reflects
racial
overtones
kind
voir
dire
close
trial
circumstance
suggests
trial
judge
refusal
inquire
particularly
racial
bias
posed
impermissible
threat
fair
trial
guaranteed
due
process
ristaino
ross
purport
identify
circumstance
explain
facts
capital
defendant
one
race
victim
another
create
significant
likelihood
racial
issues
distort
jurors
consideration
issues
trial
case
illustrates
unnecessary
adopt
per
se
rule
constitutionalizes
unjustifiable
presumption
jurors
racially
biased
ii
today
trial
judge
committed
unconstitutional
abuse
discretion
refusing
inquire
racial
prejudice
defendant
showed
racial
issues
inextricably
bound
conduct
trial
ristaino
ross
defendant
makes
showing
unacceptable
risk
racial
prejudice
distort
trial
ibid
circumstances
therefore
due
process
requires
voir
dire
include
questioning
specifically
directed
racial
prejudice
ibid
ham
south
carolina
ristaino
however
expressly
declined
adopt
per
se
rule
requiring
voir
dire
inquiry
racial
bias
every
trial
interracial
crime
neither
constitution
sound
policy
considerations
supported
per
se
approach
today
decides
constitution
require
per
se
rule
capital
cases
capital
jury
exercises
discretion
sentencing
phase
reasoning
ignores
many
procedural
substantive
safeguards
similar
governing
jury
decision
guilt
innocence
circumscribe
capital
jury
sentencing
decision
virginia
law
murder
capital
offense
willful
deliberate
premeditated
committed
perpetrator
engaged
another
crime
specified
aggravating
circumstances
code
supp
criminal
prosecution
course
state
carries
burden
proving
elements
capital
offense
beyond
reasonable
doubt
following
sentencing
hearing
death
sentence
may
imposed
unless
state
proves
beyond
reasonable
doubt
statutorily
defined
aggravating
factors
virginia
law
recognizes
two
aggravating
factors
whether
based
defendant
criminal
record
probability
commit
future
crimes
violence
whether
defendant
crime
outrageously
wantonly
vile
horrible
inhuman
involved
torture
depravity
mind
aggravated
battery
victim
code
jury
also
required
consider
relevant
mitigating
evidence
offered
defendant
existence
significant
limitations
jury
exercise
sentencing
discretion
illustrates
per
se
rule
wholly
unfounded
trial
judge
charge
guilt
phase
instructs
jurors
may
consider
evidence
case
must
determine
prosecution
established
element
crime
beyond
reasonable
doubt
charge
penalty
phase
directs
jurors
focus
solely
considerations
relevant
determination
appropriate
punishment
decide
prosecution
established
beyond
reasonable
doubt
factors
warranting
imposition
death
accordingly
reason
presume
racial
bias
part
jurors
determine
guilt
defendant
committed
violent
crime
person
another
race
reason
constitutionalize
presumption
respect
jurors
sit
recommend
penalty
capital
case
anything
circumstances
jury
recommendation
death
penalty
suggest
likelihood
sentencing
decisions
made
racial
grounds
justify
adoption
per
se
rule
question
state
proved
existence
first
aggravating
factor
beyond
reasonable
doubt
virginia
noted
since
petitioner
convicted
malicious
maiming
escape
unlawful
wounding
malicious
wounding
murder
four
offenses
occurred
penal
system
turner
commonwealth
also
expressly
found
petitioner
criminal
record
one
extensive
reviewed
capital
case
observed
although
first
aggravating
factor
plainly
supported
recommendation
death
circumstances
crime
vile
petitioner
committed
aggravated
battery
victim
foregoing
circumstances
basis
concluding
jury
sentencing
decision
tainted
racial
bias
mere
fact
sentencing
decision
jury
found
guilt
existence
aggravating
factors
beyond
reasonable
doubt
involved
element
discretion
provides
ground
presume
decision
infected
racial
prejudice
instead
rule
today
afforded
due
process
required
petitioner
establish
special
circumstances
case
beyond
fact
interracial
crime
raised
constitutionally
significant
likelihood
racial
prejudice
taint
proceedings
ristaino
ross
rejects
rule
adopts
singularly
unwise
unjustified
presumption
capital
jurors
harbor
latent
racial
bias
iii
per
se
rule
announced
today
may
appear
innocuous
rule
based
amounts
constitutional
presumption
jurors
capital
cases
racially
biased
presumption
unjustifiably
suggests
criminal
justice
courts
law
meted
racial
grounds
easy
reconcile
holding
today
principles
announced
applied
ham
south
carolina
ristaino
ross
manner
petitioner
tried
sentenced
particularly
jurors
fulfilled
civic
duty
sit
case
reflected
trace
racial
prejudice
new
rule
presumes
reasons
dissent
case
traveled
layer
review
provided
capital
defendants
state
federal
systems
july
petitioner
committed
murder
underlying
petition
trial
commenced
december
jury
convicted
petitioner
capital
murder
charges
december
following
jury
recommendation
trial
judge
sentenced
petitioner
death
february
virginia
affirmed
convictions
sentences
turner
commonwealth
denied
petition
writ
certiorari
petitioner
filed
petition
writ
habeas
corpus
circuit
county
southampton
denied
relief
virginia
denied
review
denied
petition
writ
certiorari
turner
morris
petitioner
filed
petition
writ
habeas
corpus
district
eastern
district
virginia
order
entered
may
district
denied
writ
appeals
fourth
circuit
affirmed
turner
bass
granted
certiorari
today
reverses
although
ristaino
involved
alleged
criminal
confrontation
black
assailant
white
victim
fact
pattern
alone
create
need
constitutional
dimensions
question
jury
concerning
racial
prejudice
constitutional
presumption
juror
bias
members
particular
racial
ethnic
groups
ristaino
demonstrates
per
se
constitutional
rule
circumstances
requiring
inquiry
racial
prejudice
substantial
indications
likelihood
racial
ethnic
prejudice
affecting
jurors
particular
case
trial
denial
defendant
request
examine
jurors
ability
deal
impartially
subject
amount
unconstitutional
abuse
discretion
plurality
opinion
although
justice
white
opinion
plurality
justice
rehnquist
opinion
concurring
result
entirely
consistent
foregoing
language
despite
importance
adequacy
voir
dire
easily
subject
appellate
review
trial
judge
function
point
trial
unlike
jurors
later
trial
must
reach
conclusions
impartiality
credibility
relying
evaluations
demeanor
evidence
responses
questions
see
ristaino
ross
quoting
rideau
louisiana
clark
dissenting
neither
instance
appellate
easily
conclusions
decisionmaker
heard
observed
witnesses
oral
argument
counsel
petitioner
conceded
question
client
guilt
tr
oral
arg
event
decides
new
rule
applied
prospectively
result
decision
require
trial
judges
ask
prospective
jurors
simplistic
question
voir
dire
asking
question
absence
circumstances
make
clear
need
well
negative
effect
suggesting
jurors
race
somehow
relevant
case
facts
ristaino
ross
demonstrate
general
question
prompt
juror
aware
defendant
race
jurors
case
admit
racial
bias
general
inquiry
bias
undesirable
result
suggesting
jurors
race
relevant
issues
case
circumstances
ham
south
carolina
illustrative
black
defendant
tried
possession
marijuana
defendant
well
known
community
case
tried
civil
rights
activities
theory
defense
police
framed
retaliation
activities
facts
held
unconstitutional
abuse
discretion
judge
refuse
inquire
racial
prejudice
racial
issues
central
part
trial
also
defendant
reputation
civil
rights
activist
defense
interposed
likely
intensify
prejudice
individual
members
jury
might
harbor
ristaino
ross
heterogeneous
society
policy
well
constitutional
considerations
militate
divisive
assumption
per
se
rule
justice
law
may
turn
upon
pigmentation
skin
accident
birth
choice
religion
virginia
properly
given
vileness
clause
limiting
construction
ensure
jury
discretion
recommending
capital
punishment
channeled
appropriate
standards
see
godfrey
georgia
sentence
death
may
imposed
basis
aggravating
factor
state
makes
showing
first
state
must
prove
beyond
reasonable
doubt
defendant
conduct
outrageously
wantonly
vile
horrible
inhuman
turner
commonwealth
second
state
must
prove
beyond
reasonable
doubt
torture
victim
aggravated
battery
victim
perpetrator
depravity
mind
opinion
purports
reaffirm
ristaino
ross
ante
distinguish
three
decisions
ground
none
capital
case
decision
today
reconciled
reasoning
ristaino
expressly
held
constitution
require
voir
dire
questioning
racial
bias
unless
defendant
proves
additional
circumstances
beyond
fact
case
involves
interracial
crime
moreover
two
cases
rejected
constitutional
presumption
jurors
racially
biased