schriro
director
arizona
department
corrections
summerlin
argued
april
decided
june
counsel
record
petitioner
schriro
john
pressley
todd
assistant
attorney
general
phoenix
az
respondent
summerlin
ken
murray
assistant
federal
public
defender
phoenix
az
respondent
convicted
murder
sentenced
death
arizona
capital
sentencing
scheme
effect
authorized
trial
judge
rather
jury
determine
presence
aggravating
circumstances
make
defendant
eligible
death
sentence
state
affirmed
direct
review
respondent
subsequent
federal
habeas
case
pending
ninth
circuit
decided
apprendi
new
jersey
required
existence
aggravating
factor
proved
jury
rather
judge
arizona
scheme
ring
arizona
ninth
circuit
invalidated
respondent
death
sentence
rejecting
argument
ring
apply
respondent
conviction
sentence
become
final
direct
review
ring
decided
held
ring
apply
retroactively
cases
already
final
direct
review
pp
new
rule
resulting
decision
applies
convictions
already
final
limited
circumstances
new
substantive
rules
generally
apply
retroactively
new
procedural
rules
generally
rules
criminal
procedure
implicating
fundamental
fairness
accuracy
criminal
proceeding
given
retroactive
effect
saffle
parks
rule
must
one
without
likelihood
accurate
conviction
seriously
diminished
teague
lane
pp
ring
holding
properly
classified
procedural
alter
range
conduct
class
persons
subject
death
penalty
arizona
method
determining
whether
defendant
engaged
conduct
pp
ring
announce
watershed
rule
criminal
procedure
confidently
say
judicial
factfinding
seriously
diminishes
accuracy
pp
reversed
remanded
scalia
delivered
opinion
rehnquist
kennedy
thomas
joined
breyer
filed
dissenting
opinion
stevens
souter
ginsburg
joined
dora
schriro
director
arizona
ment
corrections
petitioner
warren
wesley
summerlin
writ
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
june
justice
scalia
delivered
opinion
case
decide
whether
ring
arizona
applies
retroactively
cases
already
final
direct
review
april
finance
america
employee
brenna
bailey
disappeared
house
call
discuss
outstanding
debt
respondent
warren
summerlin
wife
evening
anonymous
woman
later
identified
respondent
called
police
accused
respondent
murdering
bailey
bailey
partially
nude
body
skull
crushed
found
next
morning
trunk
car
wrapped
bedspread
respondent
home
police
arrested
respondent
later
overheard
make
incriminating
remarks
wife
respondent
convicted
murder
sexual
assault
arizona
capital
sentencing
provisions
effect
time
authorized
death
penalty
one
several
enumerated
aggravating
factors
present
see
rev
stat
ann
west
amended
act
may
sess
laws
ch
whether
aggravating
factors
existed
however
determined
trial
judge
rather
jury
case
judge
hearing
found
two
aggravating
factors
prior
felony
conviction
involving
use
threatened
use
violence
commission
offense
especially
heinous
cruel
depraved
manner
finding
mitigating
factors
judge
imposed
death
sentence
arizona
affirmed
direct
review
state
summerlin
protracted
state
federal
habeas
proceedings
followed
respondent
case
pending
ninth
circuit
decided
apprendi
new
jersey
ring
arizona
supra
apprendi
interpreted
constitutional
guarantees
require
ther
fact
prior
conviction
fact
increases
penalty
crime
beyond
prescribed
statutory
maximum
must
submitted
jury
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
upheld
arizona
death
sentence
similar
challenge
ninth
circuit
relying
ring
invalidated
respondent
death
sentence
summerlin
stewart
en
banc
rejected
argument
ring
apply
respondent
conviction
sentence
become
final
direct
review
ring
decided
granted
certiorari
ii
decision
results
new
rule
rule
applies
criminal
cases
still
pending
direct
review
griffith
kentucky
convictions
already
final
however
rule
applies
limited
circumstances
new
substantive
rules
generally
apply
retroactively
includes
decisions
narrow
scope
criminal
statute
interpreting
terms
see
bousley
well
constitutional
determinations
place
particular
conduct
persons
covered
statute
beyond
state
power
punish
see
saffle
parks
teague
lane
plurality
opinion
rules
apply
retroactively
necessarily
carry
significant
risk
defendant
stands
convicted
act
law
make
faces
punishment
law
impose
upon
bousley
supra
quoting
davis
new
rules
procedure
hand
generally
apply
retroactively
produce
class
persons
convicted
conduct
law
make
criminal
merely
raise
possibility
someone
convicted
use
invalidated
procedure
might
acquitted
otherwise
speculative
connection
innocence
give
retroactive
effect
small
set
rules
criminal
procedure
implicating
fundamental
fairness
accuracy
criminal
proceeding
saffle
supra
quoting
teague
quoting
sawyer
smith
ninth
circuit
agreed
state
ring
announced
new
rule
nevertheless
applied
rule
retroactively
respondent
case
relying
two
alternative
theories
first
substantive
rather
procedural
second
watershed
procedural
rule
entitled
retroactive
effect
consider
theory
turn
rule
substantive
rather
procedural
alters
range
conduct
class
persons
law
punishes
see
bousley
supra
rule
hold
statute
reach
certain
conduct
make
conduct
criminal
saffle
supra
rule
decriminalize
class
conduct
prohibit
imposition
punishment
particular
class
persons
contrast
rules
regulate
manner
determining
defendant
culpability
procedural
see
bousley
supra
judged
standard
ring
holding
properly
classified
procedural
ring
held
sentencing
judge
sitting
without
jury
may
find
aggravating
circumstance
necessary
imposition
death
penalty
erie
doctrine
landgraf
usi
film
products
antiretroactivity
presumption
dobbert
florida
ex
post
facto
clause
respondent
nevertheless
argues
ring
substantive
modified
elements
offense
convicted
relies
statement
ring
ecause
arizona
enumerated
aggravating
factors
operate
functional
equivalent
element
greater
offense
sixth
amendment
requires
found
plurality
opinion
ninth
circuit
agreed
concluding
ring
reposition
ed
arizona
aggravating
factors
elements
separate
offense
capital
murder
reshap
ed
structure
arizona
murder
law
decision
modifies
elements
offense
normally
substantive
rather
procedural
new
elements
alter
range
conduct
statute
punishes
rendering
formerly
unlawful
conduct
lawful
vice
versa
see
bousley
respondent
argues
alternative
ring
falls
retroactivity
exception
rules
criminal
procedure
implicating
fundamental
fairness
accuracy
criminal
proceeding
saffle
quoting
teague
offers
several
reasons
juries
accurate
factfinders
including
tendency
group
deliberation
suppress
individual
eccentricities
jury
protection
exposure
inadmissible
evidence
better
representation
common
sense
community
ninth
circuit
majority
added
others
including
claim
judge
might
acclimated
capital
sentencing
might
swayed
political
pressure
respondent
notes
authorities
praised
jury
factfinding
ability
see
blackstone
commentaries
laws
england
georgia
brailsford
dall
jury
charge
jay
question
however
whether
framers
believed
juries
accurate
factfinders
judges
perhaps
certainly
thought
juries
independent
see
blakely
washington
ante
slip
question
whether
juries
actually
accurate
factfinders
judges
perhaps
rather
question
whether
judicial
factfinding
seriously
diminishe
accuracy
large
punishing
conduct
law
reach
teague
supra
quoting
desist
harlan
dissenting
emphasis
added
evidence
simply
equivocal
support
conclusion
first
every
argument
juries
accurate
factfinders
another
less
accurate
ninth
circuit
dissent
noted
several
including
juries
tendency
become
confused
legal
standards
influenced
emotion
philosophical
predisposition
opinion
rawlinson
citing
inter
alia
eisenberg
wells
deadly
confusion
juror
instructions
capital
cases
cornell
rev
garvey
emotional
economy
capital
sentencing
rev
bowers
sandys
steiner
foreclosed
impartiality
capital
sentencing
jurors
predispositions
experience
premature
decision
making
cornell
rev
members
opined
judicial
sentencing
may
yield
consistent
results
judges
greater
experience
see
proffitt
florida
joint
opinion
stewart
powell
stevens
finally
mixed
reception
right
jury
trial
given
countries
see
vidmar
jury
elsewhere
world
world
jury
systems
vidmar
ed
though
irrelevant
meaning
continued
existence
right
constitution
surely
makes
implausible
judicial
factfinding
seriously
diminishe
accuracy
produce
large
injustice
many
presumably
reasonable
minds
continue
disagree
whether
juries
better
factfinders
confidently
say
judicial
factfinding
seriously
diminishes
accuracy
decision
destefano
woods
per
curiam
point
refused
give
retroactive
effect
duncan
louisiana
applied
sixth
amendment
guarantee
destefano
decided
retroactivity
framework
reasoning
germane
noted
although
right
jury
trial
generally
tends
prevent
arbitrariness
repression
assert
every
criminal
trial
particular
trial
held
judge
alone
unfair
defendant
may
never
fairly
treated
judge
jury
quoting
duncan
supra
concluded
values
implemented
right
jury
trial
measurably
served
requiring
retrial
persons
convicted
past
procedures
consistent
sixth
amendment
right
jury
trial
destefano
trial
held
entirely
without
jury
impermissibly
inaccurate
hard
see
trial
judge
finds
aggravating
factors
dissent
contends
juries
accurate
better
reflect
community
standards
deciding
whether
example
murder
heinous
cruel
depraved
post
opinion
breyer
statute
condition
death
eligibility
whether
offense
heinous
cruel
depraved
determined
community
standards
see
rev
stat
ann
west
easy
find
enhanced
accuracy
jury
determination
one
redefines
statute
substantive
scope
manner
ensure
result
dissent
also
advances
several
variations
theme
death
different
rather
dramatically
different
post
much
analysis
application
teague
rejection
favor
broader
endeavor
balance
competing
considerations
post
even
inclined
revisit
teague
fashion
agree
dissent
conclusions
finally
dissent
notes
destefano
considered
factors
enhanced
accuracy
longer
relevant
teague
see
post
held
case
three
factors
favor
prospective
application
rule
emphasis
added
thus
result
even
enhanced
accuracy
sole
criterion
right
jury
trial
fundamental
system
criminal
procedure
bound
enforce
sixth
amendment
guarantees
interpret
follow
criminal
defendant
full
trial
one
round
appeals
state
faithfully
applied
constitution
understood
time
may
nevertheless
continue
litigate
claims
indefinitely
hopes
one
day
change
heart
ring
announced
new
procedural
rule
apply
retroactively
cases
already
final
direct
review
contrary
judgment
ninth
circuit
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
dora
schriro
director
arizona
ment
corrections
petitioner
warren
wesley
summerlin
writ
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
june
justice
breyer
justice
stevens
justice
souter
justice
ginsburg
join
dissenting
ring
arizona
held
jury
judge
must
make
findings
necessary
qualify
person
punishment
death
view
holding
amounts
watershed
procedural
ruling
federal
habeas
must
apply
considering
constitutional
challenge
final
death
sentence
sentence
already
final
direct
review
ring
decided
teague
lane
plurality
opinion
sets
forth
relevant
retroactivity
criteria
new
procedural
rule
applies
retroactively
habeas
proceedings
new
procedure
implicit
concept
ordered
liberty
implicating
fundamental
fairness
central
accurate
determination
innocence
guilt
absence
creates
impermissibly
large
risk
innocent
convicted
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
context
death
sentence
matter
one
innocence
guilt
second
criterion
asks
whether
new
procedure
central
accurate
determination
death
legally
appropriate
punishment
emphasis
added
see
sawyer
smith
netherland
stevens
dissenting
majority
deny
ring
meets
first
criterion
holding
implicit
concept
ordered
liberty
cf
apprendi
new
jersey
scalia
concurring
absent
apprendi
rule
jury
trial
right
intelligible
content
ring
supra
scalia
concurring
apprendi
involves
fundamental
meaning
jury
trial
guarantee
blakely
washington
ante
slip
tracing
apprendi
conception
jury
trial
right
back
blackstone
duncan
louisiana
sixth
amendment
jury
trial
guarantee
fundamental
right
rather
majority
focuses
whether
ring
meets
second
criterion
rule
central
accurate
determination
death
legally
appropriate
punishment
teague
supra
explained
separate
concurrence
ring
believe
eighth
amendment
demands
use
jury
capital
sentencing
death
sentence
must
reflect
judgment
sentence
constitutes
proper
retribution
see
stevens
dissenting
spaziano
florida
stevens
concurring
part
dissenting
part
jury
significantly
likely
judge
express
conscience
community
ultimate
question
life
death
witherspoon
illinois
justice
stevens
pointed
juries
comprised
fair
cross
section
community
representative
institutions
judiciary
reflect
accurately
composition
experiences
community
whole
inevitably
make
decisions
based
community
values
reliably
segment
community
selected
service
bench
spaziano
supra
omitted
view
matter
right
jury
sentencing
capital
context
fundamental
aspect
constitutional
liberty
also
significantly
likely
produce
accurate
assessment
whether
death
appropriate
punishment
view
ring
majority
view
majority
held
jury
must
decide
whether
special
aggravating
factors
make
offender
eligible
death
present
rested
decision
jury
judge
must
make
determination
upon
sixth
amendment
holding
apprendi
fact
increases
penalty
crime
beyond
prescribed
statutory
maximum
must
submitted
jury
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
case
majority
says
ring
rule
satisfy
teague
requirement
two
reasons
first
points
every
argument
juries
accurate
factfinders
another
less
accurate
ante
hence
one
say
confidently
judicial
factfinding
seriously
diminishes
accuracy
ante
emphasis
original
second
relies
destefano
woods
per
curiam
case
considered
whether
duncan
louisiana
supra
extended
sixth
amendment
jury
trial
guarantee
apply
retroactively
decided
duncan
retroactive
effect
majority
concludes
trial
held
entirely
without
jury
impermissibly
inaccurate
hard
see
trial
judge
finds
aggravating
factors
ante
majority
however
overlooks
three
additional
considerations
lead
opposite
conclusion
first
factfinder
role
determining
applicability
aggravating
factors
death
case
special
role
involve
simply
finding
brute
facts
also
making
value
judgments
leading
single
aggravator
charged
arizona
example
requires
factfinder
decide
whether
crime
committed
especially
heinous
cruel
depraved
manner
rev
stat
ann
west
supp
see
office
attorney
general
state
arizona
capital
case
commission
final
report
three
four
use
similar
aggravator
see
rev
stat
idaho
code
supp
neb
rev
stat
words
like
especially
heinous
cruel
depraved
particularly
asked
context
death
sentence
proceeding
require
reference
standards
standards
incorporate
values
indeed
nebraska
standard
explicitly
asks
factfinder
assess
defendant
conduct
light
ordinary
standards
morality
intelligence
ibid
jury
better
equipped
judge
identify
apply
standards
accurately
see
supra
second
teague
basic
purpose
strongly
favors
retroactive
application
ring
rule
teague
retroactivity
principles
reflect
effort
balance
competing
considerations
see
harlan
concurring
two
judgments
dissenting
one
desist
harlan
dissenting
one
hand
interests
related
certain
great
writ
basic
objectives
protecting
innocent
erroneous
conviction
punishment
assuring
fundamentally
fair
procedures
favor
applying
new
procedural
rule
retroactively
teague
supra
mackey
legal
system
commitment
equal
justice
assur
ing
uniformity
ultimate
treatment
among
prisoners
factfinding
issue
considerations
unusually
strong
force
made
clear
capital
case
eighth
amendment
requires
greater
degree
accuracy
true
noncapital
case
gilmore
taylor
hence
risk
error
law
tolerate
correspondingly
diminished
time
qualitative
difference
death
punishments
namely
severity
irrevocability
requires
correspondingly
greater
degree
scrutiny
capital
sentencing
determination
criminal
judgments
california
ramos
see
also
spaziano
burger
concurring
judgment
capital
cases
finality
sentence
imposed
warrants
protections
may
may
required
cases
consider
law
commitment
uniformity
mackey
supra
treatment
uniform
two
offenders
sentenced
death
use
procedures
know
violate
constitution
one
allowed
go
death
receives
new
constitutionally
proper
sentencing
proceeding
outside
capital
sentencing
context
one
might
understand
nature
difference
word
finality
implies
one
prisoner
already
serving
final
sentence
yet
begun
death
sentence
different
seems
entirely
future
event
event
yet
undergone
either
prisoner
respect
event
prisoners
every
important
respect
position
understand
difference
given
dramatically
different
nature
death
difference
diminishes
importance
certainly
ordinary
citizen
understand
difference
citizen
simply
witness
two
individuals
sentenced
use
unconstitutional
procedures
one
individual
going
death
saved
accident
timing
square
spectacle
called
vital
importance
defendant
nity
decision
impose
death
sentence
appear
based
reason
beck
alabama
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
justice
scalia
observation
concurring
opinion
ring
underscores
point
wrote
repeated
spectacle
man
going
death
judge
found
aggravating
factor
existed
undermine
people
traditional
veneration
protection
jury
criminal
cases
emphasis
original
equally
whether
judge
found
aggravating
factor
ring
hand
teague
recognizes
important
interests
argue
indeed
generally
forbid
retroactive
application
new
procedural
rules
interests
include
interest
insuring
point
certainty
comes
end
litigation
desirability
assuring
attention
ultimately
focused
whether
conviction
free
error
rather
whether
prisoner
restored
useful
place
community
fact
society
endless
resources
spend
upon
retrials
witnesses
become
unavailable
evidence
stale
may
well
produce
unreliable
results
mackey
supra
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
see
also
teague
certain
interests
unusually
weak
capital
sentencing
proceedings
issue
retroactivity
example
require
inordinate
expenditure
state
resources
decision
making
ring
retroactive
affect
approximately
individuals
death
row
hears
arguments
latest
death
case
number
however
large
absolute
terms
small
compared
approximately
million
individuals
presently
confined
state
prisons
dept
justice
bureau
justice
statistics
bulletin
may
consequently
impact
resources
likely
much
less
rule
affecting
ordinary
criminal
process
made
retroactive
issue
life
death
concern
attention
ultimately
focused
whether
prisoner
restored
useful
place
community
barely
relevant
mackey
supra
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
finally
believe
discount
ordinary
finality
interests
death
case
interests
comparative
nature
collateral
proceedings
event
may
stretch
many
years
regardless
cf
teague
supra
stevens
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
major
reason
justice
harlan
espoused
limited
retroactivity
collateral
proceedings
interest
making
convictions
final
interest
wholly
inapplicable
capital
sentencing
context
third
destefano
woods
per
curiam
fails
give
majority
support
hopes
destefano
decide
duncan
holding
sixth
amendment
jury
trial
right
applies
retroactive
effect
decided
destefano
teague
explicitly
took
account
purpose
served
new
standards
extent
reliance
law
enforcement
authorities
old
standards
effect
administration
justice
retroactive
application
new
standards
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
latter
two
factors
reliance
effect
administration
justice
argued
strongly
retroactivity
retroactivity
unlike
thrown
prison
doors
open
wide
least
louisiana
possibly
well
believed
first
factor
purpose
served
new
standards
also
favored
prospective
application
described
purpose
broadly
prevent
ing
arbitrariness
repression
recognized
trials
might
fair
concluded
values
served
jury
trial
guarantee
measurably
served
requiring
retrial
persons
convicted
past
without
jury
emphasis
added
contrast
case
involves
small
subclass
defendants
deprived
jury
trial
rights
relevant
harm
within
subclass
widespread
administration
justice
problem
far
less
serious
reliance
interest
less
weighty
reasons
believe
destefano
come
differently
considering
ring
rule
insofar
destefano
relevance
highlights
importance
making
retroactivity
decisions
taking
account
considerations
underlie
teague
categorical
rules
shown
considerations
argue
favor
retroactivity
case
see
supra
pointed
majority
deny
ring
rule
makes
contribution
greater
accuracy
simply
unable
say
confidently
absence
ring
rule
creates
impermissibly
large
risk
death
penalty
improperly
imposed
ante
reasons
stated
believe
risk
one
law
need
tolerate
judged
light
teague
basic
purpose
ring
requirement
jury
judge
must
apply
death
sentence
aggravators
announces
watershed
rule
criminal
procedure
applied
retroactively
habeas
proceedings
respectfully
dissent
footnotes
arizona
law
already
required
aggravating
factors
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
see
state
jordan
cert
denied
aspect
apprendi
issue
respondent
filed
habeas
petition
effective
date
antiterrorism
effective
death
penalty
act
stat
provisions
act
apply
see
lindh
murphy
state
also
sought
certiorari
ground
apprendi
violation
aggravator
exempt
apprendi
sufficient
standing
alone
authorize
death
penalty
denied
certiorari
issue
express
opinion
sometimes
referred
rules
latter
type
falling
exception
teague
bar
retroactive
application
procedural
rules
see
horn
banks
per
curiam
accurately
characterized
substantive
rules
subject
bar
respondent
also
argues
ring
substantive
understanding
arizona
law
changed
compare
ring
arizona
apprendi
new
jersey
even
understanding
state
law
changed
however
actual
content
state
law
see
state
ring
rev
grounds
state
gretzler
cert
denied
johnson
fankell
dissent
distinguishes
destefano
ground
case
involves
small
subclass
defendants
deprived
jury
trial
rights
relevant
harm
within
subclass
widespread
administration
justice
problem
far
less
serious
reliance
interest
less
weighty
post
first
third
fourth
points
irrelevant
teague
second
insofar
relates
accuracy
unsubstantiated
assertion
jury
trial
significantly
enhances
accuracy
able
hold
destefano
first
factor
prevent
ing
arbitrariness
repression
favor
retroactivity