beard
secretary
pennsylvania
department
corrections
et
al
banks
argued
february
decided
june
counsel
record
petitioners
beard
et
al
scott
gartley
assistant
district
attorney
pa
respondent
banks
albert
flora
pa
respondent
murder
conviction
death
sentence
upheld
pennsylvania
decided
mills
maryland
mckoy
north
carolina
held
invalid
capital
sentencing
schemes
requiring
juries
disregard
mitigating
factors
found
unanimously
respondent
state
postconviction
mills
claim
rejected
state
merits
turned
federal
courts
ultimately
third
circuit
applied
analytical
framework
set
forth
teague
lane
federal
habeas
petitioners
may
avail
new
rules
constitutional
criminal
procedure
outside
two
narrow
exceptions
concluded
mills
announce
new
rule
therefore
applied
retroactively
granted
respondent
relief
held
mills
announced
new
rule
constitutional
criminal
procedure
fall
within
either
teague
exception
rule
applied
retroactively
pp
teague
analysis
involves
process
requiring
determine
defendant
conviction
became
final
whether
given
legal
landscape
time
conviction
became
final
rule
sought
applied
actually
new
whether
falls
within
either
two
exceptions
nonretroactivity
respondent
conviction
became
final
mills
decided
normal
rule
determining
state
conviction
finality
retroactivity
review
availability
direct
appeal
state
courts
exhausted
time
filing
certiorari
petition
elapsed
timely
petition
finally
denied
applies
pennsylvania
considered
merits
respondent
mills
claim
collateral
review
change
conviction
finality
date
subsequent
mills
pp
mills
announced
new
rule
reaching
conclusion
mills
mckoy
relied
line
cases
beginning
lockett
ohio
lockett
general
rule
sentencer
must
allowed
consider
mitigating
evidence
thought
support
conclusion
mills
mckoy
capital
sentencing
schemes
require
juries
disregard
mitigating
factors
found
unanimously
mandate
mills
rule
cases
relied
mills
mckoy
considered
obstructions
sentencer
ability
consider
mitigating
evidence
mills
innovation
rests
shift
focus
individual
jurors
moreover
need
guess
whether
reasonable
jurists
differed
whether
lockett
line
cases
compelled
mills
four
dissenting
justices
mills
reasoned
nothing
prevented
jury
hearing
mitigating
evidence
lockett
control
three
dissenting
justices
mckoy
concluded
lockett
remotely
support
new
focus
individual
jurors
mills
rule
broke
new
ground
applies
respondent
collateral
review
falls
teague
exception
pp
mills
rule
fall
within
either
exception
argument
first
exception
applies
repeatedly
emphasized
limited
scope
second
exception
watershed
rules
criminal
procedure
implicating
fundamental
fairness
accuracy
criminal
proceeding
netherland
clearly
meant
apply
small
core
rules
requiring
observance
procedures
implicit
concept
ordered
liberty
ibid
yet
find
new
rule
falls
exception
providing
guidance
might
repeatedly
referred
rule
gideon
wainwright
altered
understanding
bedrock
procedural
elements
essential
fairness
proceeding
sawyer
smith
hesitated
hold
less
sweeping
fundamental
rules
outside
exception
see
netherland
supra
mills
mckoy
decided
avoid
potentially
arbitrary
impositions
death
sentence
mills
rule
none
primacy
centrality
rule
adopted
gideon
saffle
parks
applies
narrowly
works
fundamental
shift
bedrock
procedural
essential
fundamental
fairness
supra
pp
reversed
remanded
thomas
delivered
opinion
rehnquist
scalia
kennedy
joined
stevens
filed
dissenting
opinion
souter
ginsburg
breyer
joined
souter
filed
dissenting
opinion
ginsburg
joined
jeffrey
beard
secretary
pennsylvania
department
corrections
et
petitioners
george
banks
writ
certiorari
appeals
third
circuit
june
justice
thomas
delivered
opinion
mills
maryland
mckoy
north
carolina
held
invalid
capital
sentencing
schemes
require
juries
disregard
mitigating
factors
found
unanimously
case
must
determine
whether
rule
announced
mills
mckoy
applied
federal
habeas
corpus
review
defendant
whose
conviction
became
final
retroactivity
analysis
set
forth
teague
lane
federal
habeas
corpus
petitioners
may
avail
new
rules
criminal
procedure
outside
two
narrow
exceptions
conclude
mills
announced
new
rule
fall
within
either
teague
exceptions
years
ago
jury
convicted
respondent
george
banks
counts
murder
trial
sentenced
death
facts
case
set
forth
detail
pennsylvania
decision
affirming
respondent
conviction
sentence
direct
review
see
commonwealth
banks
direct
review
ended
denied
certiorari
october
banks
pennsylvania
approximately
eight
months
later
handed
decision
mills
supra
announced
constitution
forbids
imposing
requirement
jury
find
potential
mitigating
factor
unanimously
factor
may
considered
sentencing
decision
respondent
pursued
state
postconviction
relief
theory
instructions
verdict
form
given
jury
case
violated
mills
principle
pennsylvania
rejected
claim
merits
see
commonwealth
banks
respondent
turned
federal
courts
although
district
denied
relief
banks
horn
supp
md
appeals
third
circuit
reversed
respondent
death
sentence
banks
horn
reaching
decision
appeals
declined
apply
retroactivity
analysis
set
forth
teague
lane
supra
question
whether
mills
applied
retroactively
respondent
necessary
appeals
view
pennsylvania
applied
mills
summarily
reversed
holding
addition
performing
analysis
required
aedpa
federal
considering
habeas
petition
must
conduct
threshold
teague
analysis
issue
properly
raised
state
horn
banks
per
curiam
banks
remand
appeals
considered
retroactive
application
mills
banks
horn
recognized
primary
task
determine
whether
mills
announced
new
rule
turn
required
ascertain
whether
precedent
existing
time
respondent
conviction
became
final
dictated
compelled
rule
mills
decisions
lockett
ohio
eddings
oklahoma
direct
progeny
appeals
distilled
rule
eighth
amendment
prohibits
barrier
sentencer
consideration
mitigating
evidence
appeals
characterized
decision
mills
merely
recogniz
ing
perceived
need
unanimity
constitute
one
unconstitutional
barrier
concluded
existing
legal
landscape
compelled
decision
mills
accordingly
held
mills
applied
retroactively
respondent
reinstated
remainder
previous
opinion
granting
respondent
relief
death
granted
commonwealth
second
petition
certiorari
case
decide
whether
mills
applies
retroactively
respondent
whether
pennsylvania
unreasonably
applied
federal
law
holding
mills
error
respondent
case
although
line
cases
supports
decision
mills
compel
decision
mills
therefore
announced
new
rule
also
unable
conclude
mills
rule
falls
either
teague
exception
particular
mills
announce
watershed
rul
criminal
procedure
implicating
fundamental
fairness
accuracy
criminal
proceeding
saffle
parks
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
accordingly
reverse
judgment
ii
teague
determination
whether
constitutional
rule
criminal
procedure
applies
case
collateral
review
involves
process
see
lambrix
singletary
first
must
determine
defendant
conviction
became
final
second
must
ascertain
legal
landscape
existed
graham
collins
ask
whether
constitution
interpreted
precedent
existing
compels
rule
saffle
supra
must
decide
whether
rule
actually
new
finally
rule
new
must
consider
whether
falls
within
either
two
exceptions
nonretroactivity
lambrix
supra
ordinarily
ascertaining
date
defendant
conviction
becomes
final
poses
difficulties
state
convictions
final
purposes
retroactivity
analysis
availability
direct
appeal
state
courts
exhausted
time
filing
petition
writ
certiorari
elapsed
timely
filed
petition
finally
denied
caspari
bohlen
see
also
clay
respondent
however
urges
different
rule
argues
view
pennsylvania
unique
relaxed
waiver
rule
pursuant
considered
mills
claim
merits
conviction
became
final
teague
purposes
state
decided
mills
claim
brief
respondent
pennsylvania
practice
considering
forfeited
claims
capital
cases
respondent
insists
conventional
notions
apply
past
pennsylvania
fact
apply
relaxed
waiver
rule
death
penalty
cases
see
commonwealth
dehart
commonwealth
billa
practice
abandoned
see
commonwealth
albretcht
absolute
discretionary
commonwealth
freeman
describing
past
practice
notably
pennsylvania
expressly
stated
capital
case
decline
apply
mills
retroactively
commonwealth
peterkin
state
past
discretionary
declin
ing
apply
ordinary
waiver
principles
capital
cases
albretcht
supra
render
convictions
sentences
longer
subject
direct
review
nonfinal
teague
purposes
judgment
final
despite
possibility
state
might
discretion
decline
enforce
available
procedural
bar
choose
apply
new
rule
law
cf
wainwright
sykes
respondent
argument
reflects
fundamental
misunderstanding
teague
teague
nonretroactivity
principle
acts
limitation
power
federal
courts
grant
habeas
corpus
relief
state
prisoner
caspari
federal
habeas
corpus
courts
must
apply
teague
considering
merits
claim
whenever
state
raises
question
point
explained
banks
see
see
also
explaining
appeals
erred
focusing
pennsylvania
treatment
respondent
mills
claim
make
clear
teague
principle
protects
reasonable
judgments
state
courts
also
interest
finality
quite
apart
courts
teague
explained
many
ways
application
new
rules
cases
collateral
review
may
intrusive
enjoining
criminal
prosecutions
cf
younger
harris
continually
forces
marshal
resources
order
keep
prison
defendants
whose
trials
appeals
conformed
constitutional
standards
short
rule
determining
state
conviction
becomes
final
applies
case
without
modification
agree
appeals
respondent
conviction
became
final
see
must
therefore
assay
legal
landscape
ask
whether
rule
later
announced
mills
dictated
precedent
whether
unlawfulness
respondent
conviction
apparent
reasonable
jurists
lambrix
supra
mills
held
constitution
prohibits
requiring
jurors
find
mitigating
factors
unanimously
mckoy
mills
vacating
death
sentence
jury
instructions
gave
rise
substantial
probability
reasonable
jurors
may
thought
precluded
considering
mitigating
evidence
found
unanimously
reaching
conclusion
mills
mckoy
relied
line
cases
beginning
lockett
ohio
plurality
opinion
eddings
oklahoma
lockett
plurality
struck
ohio
death
penalty
statute
prevented
sentencer
considering
mitigating
factor
certain
aspect
defendant
character
record
certain
circumstances
offense
defendant
proffer
ed
basis
sentence
less
death
holding
evidentiary
rules
exclude
relevant
mitigating
evidence
sentencer
consideration
mills
noted
previous
cases
depend
source
potential
barrier
sentencer
ability
consider
mitigating
evidence
asserted
rule
must
apply
respect
single
juror
holdout
vote
finding
presence
mitigating
circumstance
ibid
see
also
mckoy
supra
quoting
mills
performing
analysis
generalized
lockett
rule
sentencer
must
allowed
consider
mitigating
evidence
thought
support
conclusion
mills
mckoy
essential
mandate
mills
rule
cases
relied
mills
mckoy
specifically
considered
obstructions
sentencer
ability
consider
mitigating
evidence
mills
innovation
rests
shift
focus
individual
jurors
think
clear
reasonable
jurists
differed
whether
lockett
principle
compelled
mills
see
lambrix
need
guess
mills
four
justices
dissented
reasoning
nothing
prevented
jurors
hearing
mitigating
evidence
defendant
proffered
lockett
principle
control
trend
continued
even
mills
see
saffle
parks
penry
lynaugh
franklin
lynaugh
mckoy
dissent
also
explained
mills
rule
governs
sentencer
considers
evidence
evidence
considers
dissent
view
lockett
line
governed
latter
former
see
opinion
scalia
distinction
dissent
relied
saffle
parks
supra
decided
day
held
lockett
line
cases
compel
assuming
informed
rule
may
instruct
sentencer
render
decision
evidence
without
sympathy
observed
parks
asks
us
create
rule
relating
mitigating
evidence
jury
must
permitted
consider
making
sentencing
decision
must
consider
mitigating
evidence
simple
logical
difference
rules
govern
factors
jury
must
permitted
consider
making
sentencing
decision
rules
govern
state
may
guide
jury
considering
weighing
factors
reaching
decision
ibid
thus
although
lockett
principle
conceived
high
level
generality
thought
support
mills
rule
reasonable
jurists
differed
even
point
follows
fortiori
reasonable
jurists
concluded
lockett
line
cases
compel
given
brand
new
attention
mills
paid
individual
jurors
relevance
distinction
drawn
saffle
distinguishes
mills
lockett
line
must
conclude
mills
rule
br
new
ground
teague
accordingly
mills
announced
new
rule
apply
respondent
collateral
review
unless
course
falls
one
teague
exceptions
teague
bar
retroactive
application
new
rules
constitutional
criminal
procedure
two
exceptions
first
bar
apply
rules
forbidding
punishment
certain
primary
conduct
rules
prohibiting
certain
category
punishment
class
defendants
status
offense
penry
supra
see
also
netherland
argument
exception
applies
second
exception
rules
criminal
procedure
implicating
fundamental
fairness
accuracy
criminal
proceeding
ibid
quoting
graham
repeatedly
emphasized
limited
scope
second
teague
exception
explaining
clearly
meant
apply
small
core
rules
requiring
observance
procedures
implicit
concept
ordered
liberty
supra
quoting
graham
supra
qualifying
rule
central
accurate
determination
innocence
guilt
unlikely
many
components
basic
due
process
yet
emerge
graham
supra
quoting
teague
supra
come
surprise
yet
find
new
rule
falls
second
teague
exception
perhaps
reason
respondent
even
attempt
argue
mills
qualifies
rebut
petitioners
argument
brief
petitioners
providing
guidance
might
fall
within
exception
repeatedly
referred
rule
gideon
wainwright
right
counsel
rule
see
saffle
supra
cf
gilmore
taylor
blackmun
dissenting
gideon
overruled
betts
brady
noting
betts
made
abrupt
break
precedents
continued
lawyers
prosecute
everywhere
deemed
essential
protect
public
interest
orderly
society
similarly
defendants
charged
crime
indeed
fail
hire
best
lawyers
get
prepare
present
defenses
government
hires
lawyers
prosecute
defendants
money
hire
lawyers
defend
strongest
indications
widespread
belief
lawyers
criminal
courts
necessities
luxuries
right
one
charged
crime
counsel
may
deemed
fundamental
essential
fair
trials
countries
beginning
state
national
constitutions
laws
laid
great
emphasis
procedural
substantive
safeguards
designed
assure
fair
trials
impartial
tribunals
every
defendant
stands
equal
law
noble
ideal
realized
poor
man
charged
crime
face
accusers
without
lawyer
assist
ibid
emphasis
added
see
also
quoting
powell
alabama
gideon
fair
say
alter
ed
understanding
bedrock
procedural
elements
essential
fairness
proceeding
sawyer
smith
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
contrast
hesitated
hold
less
sweeping
fundamental
rules
fall
within
teague
second
exception
netherland
supra
example
considered
retroactivity
rule
announced
simmons
south
carolina
simmons
held
capital
defendant
must
allowed
inform
sentencer
ineligible
parole
prosecution
argues
future
dangerousness
rejected
petitioner
argument
simmons
rule
par
gideon
wainwright
emphasizing
sweeping
nature
gideon
established
affirmative
right
counsel
felony
cases
supra
sawyer
smith
supra
considered
whether
habeas
petitioner
make
use
rule
announced
caldwell
mississippi
holding
eighth
amendment
bars
imposition
death
penalty
jury
led
believe
responsibility
ultimate
decision
rested
elsewhere
declined
give
retroactive
effect
rule
effectively
withheld
relevant
information
sentencer
see
sawyer
supra
acknowledged
caldwell
rule
intended
enhance
accuracy
capital
sentencing
fall
within
second
teague
exception
recognize
avoidance
potentially
arbitrary
impositions
death
sentence
motivated
mills
mckoy
mills
described
two
troubling
situations
theoretically
occur
absent
mills
rule
eleven
jurors
example
agree
six
mitigating
circumstances
existed
one
holdout
juror
nevertheless
force
death
sentence
similarly
jurors
agree
mitigating
circumstances
existed
outweighed
aggravators
agree
mitigating
circumstances
present
return
death
sentence
see
mills
see
also
mckoy
describing
examples
imposition
death
penalty
circumstances
reasoned
arbitrariness
quoting
mills
supra
see
also
mckoy
supra
kennedy
concurring
judgment
quite
obviously
decided
mills
mckoy
avoid
possibility
eighth
amendment
jurisprudence
concerning
capital
sentencing
directed
toward
enhancement
reliability
accuracy
sense
fact
new
rule
removes
remote
possibility
arbitrary
infliction
death
sentence
suffice
bring
within
teague
second
exception
sawyer
supra
however
laudable
mills
rule
might
none
primacy
centrality
rule
adopted
gideon
saffle
mills
rule
applies
fairly
narrowly
works
fundamental
shift
understanding
bedrock
procedural
elements
essential
fundamental
fairness
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
therefore
conclude
mills
rule
fall
within
second
teague
exception
iii
hold
mills
announced
new
rule
constitutional
criminal
procedure
falls
within
neither
teague
exception
accordingly
rule
applied
retroactively
respondent
judgment
appeals
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
jeffrey
beard
secretary
pennsylvania
department
corrections
et
petitioners
george
banks
writ
certiorari
appeals
third
circuit
june
justice
stevens
justice
souter
justice
ginsburg
justice
breyer
join
dissenting
capital
sentencing
procedure
required
jury
return
death
sentence
even
single
juror
supported
outcome
height
arbitrariness
ante
opinion
use
procedure
unquestionably
unconstitutional
today
believe
equally
respondent
death
sentence
became
final
reaches
different
conclusion
reads
mills
maryland
announce
new
rule
criminal
procedure
may
applied
federal
habeas
review
defendants
whose
convictions
became
final
mills
decided
ante
opinion
however
mills
simply
represented
straightforward
application
longstanding
view
eighth
fourteenth
amendments
tolerate
infliction
sentence
death
legal
syste
permit
unique
penalty
wantonly
freakishly
imposed
furman
georgia
per
curiam
stewart
concurring
dispute
mills
concerned
jury
instructions
verdict
form
majority
read
create
substantial
probability
reasonable
jurors
well
may
thought
precluded
considering
mitigating
evidence
unless
jurors
agreed
existence
particular
quoting
mills
per
curiam
woodson
north
carolina
plurality
opinion
recognizing
arbitrary
imposition
penalty
violates
eighth
zant
stephens
gregg
georgia
furman
supra
mandating
procedures
guarantee
full
consideration
mitigating
evidence
eddings
oklahoma
lockett
ohio
plurality
opinion
indeed
judgment
kind
arbitrariness
enable
vote
favor
death
outweigh
favor
forbearance
violate
bedrock
fairness
principles
governed
trial
proceedings
centuries
rejecting
manifestly
unfair
procedural
innovation
announce
new
rule
covered
teague
lane
simply
affirms
fairness
principles
permit
blatant
leaves
question
whether
reasonable
jurors
read
pennsylvania
jury
instructions
verdict
form
impose
unanimity
requirement
respect
mitigating
circumstances
reasons
identified
third
circuit
banks
horn
see
also
banks
horn
leaving
place
relevant
portions
earlier
opinion
particularly
respect
verdict
form
answer
question
affirmative
affirm
judgment
appeals
jeffrey
beard
secretary
pennsylvania
department
corrections
et
petitioners
george
banks
writ
certiorari
appeals
third
circuit
june
justice
souter
justice
ginsburg
joins
dissenting
join
justice
stevens
dissenting
opinion
case
add
word
way
see
relation
justice
breyer
dissenting
opinion
schriro
summerlin
ante
cases
line
began
teague
lane
determining
whether
mills
maryland
new
rule
constitutional
law
purpose
teague
general
bar
applying
rules
collateral
review
invokes
perspective
reasonable
jurists
ante
quoting
lambrix
singletary
see
also
ante
acknowledges
however
standard
objective
presence
actual
disagreement
among
jurists
even
among
members
conclusively
establish
rule
novelty
ante
cf
wright
west
concurring
judgment
objectively
reasonable
jurist
cousin
common
law
reasonable
person
whose
job
impose
judicially
determined
standard
conduct
litigants
come
similarly
function
teague
standard
distinguish
developments
jurisprudence
state
judges
anticipated
expected
foresee
applying
teague
engages
ongoing
process
defining
characteristics
reasonable
jurist
identifying
arguments
reasonable
jurists
accept
particular
characteristic
stake
degree
reasonable
jurist
avoid
risk
certain
kind
erroneous
outcome
capital
case
mills
rule
protects
essentially
kind
error
justice
breyer
discusses
summerlin
death
sentence
arbitrary
inaccurate
putative
expression
conscience
community
ultimate
question
life
death
ante
quoting
witherspoon
illinois
justice
breyer
explained
summerlin
opinion
new
rules
demanding
kind
accuracy
applied
teague
exception
longstanding
espousal
accurate
expression
community
conscience
also
inform
judgment
debatable
case
newness
rule
justice
stevens
says
death
sentence
based
upon
verdict
jurors
relied
given
mitigating
circumstance
spare
defendant
life
single
holdout
blocked
surely
egregious
failure
express
public
conscience
accurately
ante
dissenting
opinion
question
presented
case
ultimately
whether
deem
reasonable
thus
immunize
collateral
attack
least
first
teague
stage
reading
precedents
accepts
risk
errors
maryland
pennsylvania
jury
instructions
verdict
form
produced
concludes
compared
eddings
oklahoma
mills
shift
ed
focus
obstructions
sentencer
ability
consider
mitigating
evidence
abilities
individual
jurors
reasonable
jurist
drawn
distinction
basis
ante
approach
gives
considerable
weight
reasonable
jurist
analytical
capacity
pick
arguably
material
differences
sets
facts
relatively
less
jurist
understanding
substance
principles
underlying
eighth
amendment
cases
follow
furman
georgia
per
curiam
although
view
reasonable
jurist
inconsistent
teague
progeny
reasons
given
justice
breyer
dissent
summerlin
ante
convinced
reading
teague
gives
much
importance
finality
capital
sentences
enough
accuracy
affirm
judgment
appeals
respectfully
dissent
footnotes
judge
sloviter
wrote
separately
express
view
mills
maryland
established
new
rule
qualified
neither
teague
lane
exception
opinion
concurring
judgment
judge
sloviter
nevertheless
posited
mills
applied
respondent
pennsylvania
unique
relaxed
waiver
doctrine
capital
cases
given
determination
appeals
erred
holding
mills
applied
retroactively
respondent
reach
question
whether
appeals
also
erred
concluding
pennsylvania
unreasonably
applied
mills
rules
fall
within
referred
teague
first
exception
accurately
characterized
substantive
rules
subject
teague
bar
schriro
summerlin
ante
slip
see
also
infra
although
nothing
case
turns
note
arguable
mills
rule
fully
emerge
issued
mckoy
north
carolina
see
scalia
dissenting
focus
inquiry
whether
reasonable
jurists
differ
whether
precedent
compels
rule
suggest
mere
existence
dissent
suffices
show
rule
new
appeals
erred
drawing
lockett
ohio
eddings
oklahoma
general
rule
constitution
prohibited
barrier
jury
consideration
mitigating
evidence
emphasis
added
without
also
acknowledging
rule
purposes
teague
analysis
automatically
extend
arguably
analogous
contexts
respect
last
point
reasonable
jurists
fact
differ
noted
rules
properly
viewed
substantive
therefore
subject
teague
bar
see
supra
footnotes
justice
kennedy
made
precisely
point
concurrence
mckoy
north
carolina
application
death
penalty
basis
single
juror
vote
disturbing
important
represents
imposition
capital
punishment
system
described
arbitrary
capricious
mills
described
result
arbitrariness
given
description
apparent
result
mills
fits
within
line
cases
forbidding
imposition
capital
punishment
basis
arbitrary
unpredictable
fashion
means
supporting
reading
even
dissenting
justices
mills
maryland
challenge
majority
assumption
instructions
unambiguously
requiring
unanimity
existence
mitigating
factor
unconstitutional
argued
reasonable
jurors
understood
order
mark
mitigating
factor
sentencing
form
jurors
agree
rehnquist
dissenting
emphasis
added
recognize
justices
believe
mills
occasion
consider
constitutionality
unanimity
requirement
state
conceded
point
see
mckoy
scalia
dissenting
although
language
mills
suggesting
unanimity
requirement
contravene
decisions
issue
plainly
presented
mills
therefore
decided
mills
author
justice
blackmun
disagreed
view
however
maryland
instructions
issue
mills
held
invalid
susceptible
two
plausible
interpretations
one
interpretations
instructions
unconstitutional
mckoy
emphasis
original
think
justice
blackmun
better
argument
even
one
assumes
mills
dissenters
failed
defend
constitutionality
unanimity
requirements
think
issue
properly
rather
condemned
requirements
overall
point
remains
executing
defendant
jurors
believes
appropriate
penalty
wanto
freakis
violate
eighth
fourteenth
amendments
furman
georgia
per
curiam
stewart
concurring
violation
clear
today
footnotes
see
netherland
holding
new
rule
simmons
south
carolina
jury
may
misled
defendant
parole
eligiblity
prosecutor
argues
future
dangerousness
lambrix
singletary
holding
new
rule
espinosa
florida
per
curiam
florida
jury
consideration
vague
aggravating
factor
taints
judge
later
death
sentence
see
also
stringer
black
souter
dissenting
arguing
rule
maynard
cartwright
sentencer
weighing
among
others
vague
aggravating
factor
taints
death
sentence
new