ramdass angelone director virginia department corrections argued april decided june petitioner ramdass sentenced death virginia murder mohammed kayani virginia law conviction become final jury returns verdict time thereafter judge enters final judgment conviction time kayani sentencing trial final judgment entered ramdass armed robbery pizza hut restaurant jury found guilty armed robbery domino pizza restaurant final judgment entered prosecutor argued future dangerousness kayani sentencing trial claiming ramdass commit violent crimes released jury recommended death final judgment entered domino conviction kayani judge held hearing consider whether impose recommended sentence arguing life sentence ramdass claimed prior convictions made ineligible parole virginia law denies parole person convicted three separate felony offenses murder rape armed robbery part common act transaction scheme sentenced ramdass death virginia affirmed remand virginia affirmed sentence declining apply holding simmons south carolina jury considering imposing death told defendant parole ineligible state law concluded ramdass parole ineligible jury considering sentence domino crime final judgment entered count conviction purposes law ultimately ramdass sought federal habeas relief district granted petition appeals reversed held judgment affirmed pp affirmed justice kennedy joined chief justice justice scalia justice thomas concluded ramdass entitled jury instruction parole ineligibility virginia law pp whether ramdass may obtain relief simmons governed habeas corpus statute forbids relief unless adjudication federal claim contrary unreasonable application clearly established federal law determined virginia ruling neither contrary simmons unreasonable application rationale pp simmons created workable rule instruction required assuming jury fixes life sentence defendant ineligible parole state law instruction required simmons legally accurate however case virginia authoritative determination ramdass parole ineligible jury considered sentence material differences exist case simmons simmons defendant conclusively established parole ineligibility time sentencing ramdass sentence imposed simmons defendant prior conviction pleaded guilty domino case tried jury sentence imposed grounds challenging guilty plea simmons defendant state limited ramdass additional attempts equate case simmons refute critical point parole ineligible matter state law time sentencing trial pp extending simmons cover situations looks like defendant turn parole ineligible neither necessary workable virginia unreasonable refusing require courts evaluate probability future events cases law issue entitled latitude field admissibility evidence capital sentencing issue left subject federal requirements extending simmons also give rise litigation peripheral point since parole eligibility may indirectly related circumstances crime considered uncertain materiality state entitled deference determining best reference point making ineligibility determination virginia rule using judgment domino case determine parole ineligibility arbitrary virtue virginia also allowing prosecutor introduce evidence ramdass unadjudicated prior bad acts show future dangerousness public opinion polls showing likely effect parole ineligibility jury verdicts cast doubt upon state rule ramdass claim based contention inevitable judgment conviction entered domino crime practice virginia courts consider grant motions set aside jury verdicts ramdass time file motion domino case expired jury deliberating kayani sentence ramdass complains using entry judgment rather jury verdict determine finality arbitrary availability postjudgment relief renders uncertain judgment finality reliability however may take different approaches judgment usual measure finality trial ramdass conduct litigation confirms conclusion reached indicate trial thought never paroled mention law trial appears argue parole ineligibility determined based date domino verdict virginia declared another one convictions count strike pp state courts remain free adopt rules go beyond constitution minimum requirements fact virginia allows simmons instruction even future dangerousness issue since also eliminated parole capital defendants sentenced life prison capital defendants receive instruction pp justice agreed ramdass entitled habeas relief standard review applicable federal habeas cases narrower applicable direct review whether defendant entitled inform jury parole ineligible ultimately federal law question looks state law determine defendant parole status virginia law ramdass parole ineligible entry judgment purely ministerial act virginia law facts case materially indistinguishable simmons south carolina case however virginia law guilty verdict inevitably lead entry judgment order consequently virginia decision neither contrary unreasonable application simmons pp kennedy announced judgment delivered opinion rehnquist scalia thomas joined filed opinion concurring judgment stevens filed dissenting opinion souter ginsburg breyer joined bobby lee ramdass petitioner ronald angelone director virginia ment corrections writ certiorari appeals fourth circuit june justice kennedy announced judgment delivered opinion chief justice justice scalia justice thomas join petitioner received death sentence commonwealth virginia murder course robbery review decision denying relief federal habeas corpus seeks set aside death sentence reliance simmons south carolina argues jury instructed parole ineligibility based prior criminal convictions reject claims conclude simmons inapplicable petitioner since parole ineligible jury considered case parole ineligible reason conviction case consideration jury entitled relief seeks sometime midnight september mohammed kayani working convenience store clerk petitioner bobby lee ramdass accomplices entered store forced customers floor gunpoint petitioner ordered kayani open store safe accomplices took customers wallets money cash registers cigarettes kool aid lottery tickets kayani fumbled initial attempt open safe petitioner squatted next yelled open safe close range held gun kayani head pulled trigger gun fire first petitioner tried shot kayani left ear killing petitioner stood body laughed later inquired accomplice customers killed well murder kayani isolated incident four months earlier serving time robbery conviction petitioner released parole almost engaged series violent crimes july petitioner committed murder alexandria virginia august petitioner three accomplices committed armed robbery pizza hut restaurant abducting one victims four days later petitioner accomplice robbed hotel clerk afternoon august petitioner two accomplices robbed taxicab driver emanuel selassie shot head left dead major surgery weeks unconsciousness selassie survived day selassie shooting petitioner committed armed robbery domino pizza restaurant crime spree ended petitioner arrest september nine days kayani shooting petitioner faced series criminal prosecutions reasons discuss later sequence events criminal proceedings important claim petitioner makes virginia law conviction become final trial two steps occurred first jury must return guilty verdict second time thereafter judge must enter final judgment conviction pronounce sentence unless determines set verdict aside december jury returned guilty verdict based pizza hut robbery january jury rendered guilty verdict domino robbery january trial entered judgment conviction pizza hut verdict january sentencing phase kayani murder trial completed jury recommending petitioner sentenced death crime february trial entered judgment domino verdict capital trial kayani killing petitioner pleaded guilty july murder alexandria shooting selassie thus time capital sentencing trial final judgment conviction entered pizza hut crime jury found petitioner guilty domino crime trial entered final judgment conviction charges alexandria murder yet filed indeed petitioner denied role crime sometime sentencing phase instant case sentencing phase capital murder trial kayani murder commonwealth submitted case jury using future dangerousness aggravating circumstance arguing death penalty imposed ramdass commit criminal acts violence constitute continuing serious threat society code ann petitioner countered arguing never released jail even jury refused sentence death proposition ramdass relied sentences receive crimes detailed including yet go trial domino crime judgment entered sentence pronounced counsel argued petitioner going jail rest life ask give life life never see light day app another point counsel argued ramdass never jail sentence today insure lives hundred twenty two spend rest life prison arguments drew objection commonwealth prosecution case sentencing consisted account ramdass prior crimes including crimes ramdass yet charged tried shooting selassie assault hotel clerk investigators ramdass crimes accomplice two victims provided narrative descriptions crime spree preceding murder evidence crimes basis prosecution case sentencing hearing evidence crime spree depend formal convictions admission prosecutor moreover mention domino crime opening statement introduce evidence crime commonwealth case chief app ramdass first injected domino crime sentencing proceeding testifying response lawyer questions involvement crime closing prosecutor argued ramdass live rules society either prison juror deliberations jury sent note judge asking defendant given life possibility parole time natural death petitioner counsel suggested following response must concern matters occur impose sentence may impose sic sentence legal sentence imposed case trial judge refused instruction relying virginia law parole appropriate factor jury consider informed jury concern selves may happen afterwards next day jury returned verdict recommending death sentence virginia law permitted judge give life sentence despite jury recommendation two months later trial conducted hearing decide whether jury recommended sentence imposed interval jury trial sentencing hearing final judgment entered domino conviction sentencing hearing ramdass counsel argued first time prior convictions rendered ineligible parole virginia law denies parole person convicted three separate felony offenses murder rape armed robbery part common act transaction scheme code ann petitioner counsel also stated three jurors contacted petitioner counsel verdict expressed opinion life sentence imposed known ramdass eligible parole jurors identified name produced testimony provided formal sworn statements supporting defense counsel representations app rejecting petitioner arguments life sentence trial sentenced petitioner death ramdass appealed arguing parole ineligibility characterized disclosed jury virginia rejected claim applying settled law jury hear evidence parole eligibility ineligibility relevant consideration fixing appropriate sentence ramdass commonwealth address whether ramdass waived claim failing mention law trial objecting instructions given virginia capital defendants ramdass position raising issue trial despite existing virginia law contrary mickens commonwealth thompson blackmun respecting denial certiorari mueller commonwealth eaton commonwealth state denial claims direct review ramdass filed petition writ certiorari one arguments judge instructed jury ineligible parole petition pending decided simmons south carolina held defendant parole ineligible state law time jury death penalty deliberations jury informed fact granted ramdass petition certiorari remanded case reconsideration light simmons ramdass virginia remand virginia affirmed ramdass death sentence concluding simmons applied ramdass ineligible parole jury considering sentence ramdass commonwealth held ramdass parole ineligible jury considered sentence kayani murder conviction third conviction purposes law conclusion challenged count robbery conviction one qualified provision appears crime involve use weapon also held domino robbery count conviction final judgment entered verdict thus conviction prior kayani murder verdict counting strike time sentencing trial pizza hut robbery unless law operative ramdass eligible parole time trial murder convicts became eligible parole years code ann state law ramdass parole ineligible time sentencing virginia declined apply simmons reverse ramdass sentence ramdass filed petition writ certiorari contending virginia misapplied simmons denied certiorari ramdass virginia unsuccessful round postconviction proceedings virginia courts ramdass sought habeas corpus relief federal argued virginia erred applying simmons district granted relief supp ed appeals reversed ramdass filed third petition writ certiorari stayed execution granted certiorari ramdass contends entitled jury instruction parole ineligibility virginia law rejecting contention affirm ii petitioner bases request habeas corpus relief simmons supra premise simmons case south carolina law capital defendant ineligible parole jury vote life sentence future dangerousness issue plurality opinion concluded due process entitled defendant inform jury parole ineligibility either jury instruction arguments counsel later decision netherland held simmons created new rule purposes teague lane reaffirmed discretion determining extent sentencing jury advised probable future custody parole status future dangerousness case subject rule simmons extended simmons cases parole ineligibility established matter state law time jury future dangerousness deliberations capital case whether ramdass may obtain relief simmons governed habeas corpus statute supp iii forbids relief unless adjudication federal claim resulted decision contrary involved unreasonable application clearly established federal law determined explained justice opinion williams taylor slip state acts contrary clearly established federal law applies legal rule contradicts prior holdings reaches different result one cases despite confronting indistinguishable facts statute also authorizes federal habeas corpus relief clearly established federal law state unreasonable applying governing legal principle facts case state determination may set aside standard clearly established federal law state unreasonable refusing extend governing legal principle context principle controlled virginia ruling case us neither contrary simmons unreasonable application rationale petitioner contends case indistinguishable simmons making virginia refusal grant relief contrary case view pizza hut conviction domino guilty verdict classified like simmons petitioner ineligible parole jury deliberated sentence makes argument even though virginia declared parole ineligible time sentencing trial judgment conviction entered domino crime simmons created workable rule instruction required assuming jury fixes sentence life defendant ineligible parole state law plurality opinion limiting holding situations state law prohibits defendant release parole relying fact simmons ineligible parole state law concurring citing state statutes demonstrate simmons available alternative sentence death life imprisonment without possibility parole instruction required simmons agreed instruction informing jury petitioner ineligible parole legally accurate case simmons instruction accurate law authoritative determination virginia petitioner ineligible parole jury considered sentence simmons defendant conclusively established parole ineligibility time sentencing ramdass simmons sentence imposed defendant prior conviction pleaded guilty ramdass domino case tried jury sentence imposed south carolina defendant might challenge guilty plea grounds limited see rivers strickland general rule plea guilty voluntarily understandingly made constitutes waiver nonjurisdictional defects defenses including claims violation constitutional rights prior plea see also whetsell south carolina events motion seek set aside jury verdict considered motion trial jury verdict case simmons indicate south carolina law considered guilty plea sentence insufficient render defendant parole ineligible upon conviction another crime material differences exist case simmons virginia decision contrary rule simmons announced ramdass makes two arguments equate case simmons neither contention refutes critical point ineligible parole matter state law time sentencing trial first contends simmons petitioner parole ineligible time sentencing trial according ramdass south carolina prisoner parole ineligible state board probation makes formal determination parole ineligibility state board done capital sentencing jury fixed simmons penalty argument without merit virginia argue ramdass parole eligible parole board acted argues ramdass still parole eligible time sentencing trial reason criminal record stood state law note ramdass bases argument briefs record filed simmons failure state glean information record controlling decision refine holdings accordingly necessarily render ruling contrary unreasonable application clearly established federal law determined review state decisions habeas corpus state courts responsible faithful application principles set controlling opinion second ramdass argues simmons allowed prisoner obtain instruction even though hypothetical future events escape pardon change law might mean prisoner point released prison argument likewise assistance ramdass simmons petitioner matter state law ineligible parole time sentencing trial state left argue future events might change status otherwise permit simmons reenter society ramdass situation opposite eligible parole time sentencing trial forced argue hypothetical future event entry judgment domino convictions render parole ineligible state law despite current status case parallel simmons critical point differences cases foreclose conclusion virginia decision denying ramdass relief contrary simmons ramdass contends virginia nevertheless bound extend simmons cover circumstances urges us ignore legal rules dictating parole eligibility state law favor calls functional approach seems evaluates whether looks like defendant turn parole ineligible agree extension simmons either necessary workable confident saying virginia unreasonable refusing requested extension simmons applies instances legal matter possibility parole jury decides appropriate sentence life prison petitioner proposed rule require courts evaluate probability future events cases law issue among matters consider whether trial unrelated proceeding grant postverdict relief whether conviction reversed appeal whether defendant prosecuted fully investigated yet uncharged crimes inquiry include whether defendant point released prison even age health prisoner facing long period incarceration seem relevant possibilities many certainties simmons rule extended beyond defendant matter state law parole ineligible time trial state might well conclude jury distracted vital issues case entitled latitude field admissibility evidence capital sentencing remains issue left subject course federal requirements especially relevant related admission mitigating evidence california ramos eliminating simmons rule petitioner approach give rise litigation peripheral point parole eligibility may unrelated circumstances crime jury considering character defendant except indirect way evidence potential parole ineligibility uncertain materiality overcome jury concludes even defendant might paroled may escape murder see garner jones may pardoned may benefit change parole laws change law might operate invalidate conviction thought beyond review see bousley may less risk society prison see battle cert denied virginia good reason extend simmons beyond circumstances case included conclusive proof parole ineligibility state law time sentencing jury evaluating future dangerousness virginia law considers defendant recent criminal history without confined convictions pointed domino pizza conviction even part prosecution main case sentencing proceedings parole ineligibility hand relate formal criminal proceedings state entitled deference context parole laws determining best reference point making ineligibility determination given damaging testimony criminal acts spree ramdass embarked upon weeks kayani murder difficult say weight jury given possibility parole error state insist upon accurate assessment parole rules using trial judgment measuring point explained dispositive fact simmons defendant conclusively established parole ineligibility state law time trial ramdass judicial determination virginia uses establish conviction finality parole law note virginia rule using judgment domino case determine parole ineligibility arbitrary virtue virginia also allowing evidence defendant prior criminal history demonstrate ramdass evil character propensity commit violent acts future prosecutor used ramdass prior criminal conduct supported cases although domino case evidence form resulting jury verdicts virginia law require guilty verdict criminal judgment exhaustion appeal prior criminal conduct introduced trial virginia law instead permitted unadjudicated prior bad acts introduced evidence trial see watkins commonwealth example prosecutor permitted use shooting selassie aggravation even though verdict rendered case prosecutor likewise asked ramdass july murder alexandria app despite ramdass sworn denial pleaded guilty crime sentenced death case guilty verdict jury domino case therefore necessary prerequisite admissibility conduct underlying domino crime ramdass furthermore object commonwealth use domino crime sentencing introduced evidence commonwealth mention crime opening statement present evidence crime case chief ramdass used domino crime argue never jail overused crime even purpose counsel advised jury domino crime result least another life sentence fact sentence imposed years various public opinion polls pointed cast doubt upon rule adopted state referred example poll whose result reported paduano smith deathly errors juror misperceptions concerning parole imposition death penalty colum human rights rev poll said permit conclusion potential jurors likely give life sentence instead death knew defendant serve least years prison parole eligible poll proper consideration mere citation law review suffice introduce evidence truth hearsay scientific conclusions contained within creators poll taken stand support poll application ramdass case poll likely demonstrated inadmissible poll reporters concede poll limited scope surveying individuals eligible jury service poll limited jurors one georgia county jurors never serve fairfax county virginia jury poll supervised southern prisoners defense committee group interest obtaining life sentences inmates represents poll conducted context ongoing litigation particular defendant death sentence article makes reference independent source confirming propriety sampling methodology poll asked four questions failed ask surveyed held views ascertain reaction evidence supplied prosecution designed counter parole information data indicates questions framed using methodology employed reliable pollsters indication exists regarding amount time participants given answer reporters poll contend similar limited studies support results yet studies conducted telephone defense attorneys connection motions new trials deficiencies relied upon courts factfinding powers exclude minimize survey evidence amstar domino pizza inadequate survey universe dreyfus fund royal bank canada supp sdny unreliable sampling technique general motors cadillac marine boat supp wd people surveyed kingsford products kingsfords supp sample drawn wrong area conagra geo hormel supp neb survey failed ask reasons participant provided answer selected sterling drug bayer ag supp sdny questions properly drafted american home products proctor gamble supp nj respondents given extended time answer gucci gucci shops supp sdny surveys conducted recognized independent experts schering schering aktiengesellschaft supp nj attorney contact interference invalidates poll see generally toys us canarsie kiddie shop supp edny listing factors consider determining whether survey reliable poll reported columbia human rights law review considered see stanford kentucky plurality opinion virginia decision rejecting ramdass claims review habeas proceeding required consult public opinion polls ramdass claim based contention inevitable judgment conviction entered domino crime calls entry judgment following jury verdict ministerial act whose performance foreseeable imminent inexorable brief petitioner petitioner cites authority proposition judicial officer determination final judgment entered opposed clerk noting final judgment record ministerial act surprised doubt lawyers consider criminal case concluded trial judgment entered judgment signals case become final end reach another stage proceedings see sup rule requiring notice appeal filed within days entry final judgment motions essential part virginia criminal law practice discussed leading treatises costello virginia criminal law procedure ed bacigal virginia criminal procedure ed virginia rule verdict guilty may set aside error committed trial evidence insufficient matter law sustain conviction examples reports virginia decisions demonstrate procedure virginia trial courts consider grant motions set aside jury verdicts floyd commonwealth payne commonwealth johnson commonwealth app walker commonwealth app gorham commonwealth app carter commonwealth app cullen commonwealth app motion set aside may filed resolved judgment entered walker supra trial courts may conduct hearings allow evidence introduced motions postverdict motions may granted despite denial motion strike evidence made trial gorham supra denial pretrial motion dismiss cullen supra federal judges familiar virginia practice held postverdict motions give defendant full fair opportunity raise claims trial error di paola riddle contexts beyond statute virginia courts held possibility postverdict relief renders jury verdict uncertain unreliable judgment entered dowel commonwealth app see also smith commonwealth blair commonwealth availability postverdict motions mean defendant option whether let judgment entered regular order one recent case virginia appeals relied rule hold contrary petitioner contention incorrect statement law say trial concern proceedings jury verdict davis commonwealth wl va time ramdass file motion set aside domino verdict expired jury deliberating sentence kayani murder concedes filed motions domino case pending different county kayani murder trial record contains indication ramdass counsel advised judge kayani case pursue postverdict relief domino case virginia reasonable reject parole ineligibility instruction defendant become ineligible event trial judge different county entered final judgment unrelated criminal case ramdass complains virginia selection entry judgment rather jury verdict arbitrary points trial may set judgment aside within days entry sup rule appeal also permitted agree ramdass availability postjudgment relief trial appeal renders uncertain finality reliability even judgment trial jurisprudence teague lane example consider conviction final direct review process completed netherland may take different approaches see support rule require state declare conviction final purposes statute verdict rendered verdicts may overturned state trial state appellate state state collateral attack federal habeas corpus review proceedings virginia approach permit simmons instruction despite availability postjudgment relief might day jury instructed defendant parole ineligible undo one strikes supporting instruction provided ramdass sufficient protection judgment verdict usual measure finality trial conclusion confirmed review petitioner conduct litigation current claim certain time trial ramdass never released parole event jury sentenced life belied testimony counsel elicited sentencing ramdass counsel asked going spend rest life prison despite claim advanced parole impossible answer counsel elicited ramdass trial know think ramdass answer trial accurate assessment uncertainties surrounded parole custody status time trial like manner virginia decision challenged unreasonable petitioner argued parole eligibility determined based date domino verdict january rather date judgment entered february mention law trial although domino verdict already returned petitioner brief virginia remand conceded appropriate date consider domino crime date judgment brief ramdass convicted february armed robbery course february convictio occurred jury findings case app thus virginia treated domino conviction manner urged petitioner petitioner change heart controlling date appears based belated realization robbery conviction qualify strike meaning needed domino conviction count accomplish task petitioner began arguing date jury verdict controlled original position however one accord virginia law state trial judges appellate courts remain free course experiment adopting rules go beyond minimum requirements constitution regard note jury informed ramdass time trial eligible parole years trial judge power override recommended death sentence ramdass prior convictions subject set aside trial appeal statement accurate matter law statement might also made probable jury recommended death sentence note virginia expanded simmons allowing defendant obtain simmons instruction even defendant future dangerousness issue yarbrough commonwealth likewise virginia ramdass conviction eliminated parole capital defendants sentenced life prison combination yarbrough elimination parole means capital defendants virginia receive simmons instruction desire circumstances like presented even instruction given subject addressed simmons extent trial addressed contingencies affect finality convictions altogether clear full elaboration various ways set conviction aside grant new trial might favorable petitioner events constitution require instruction ramdass requests sentencing proceeding invalid reason omission iii virginia decision deny petitioner relief neither contrary unreasonable application simmons appeals fourth circuit required deny relief ed supp iii affirm judgment ordered bobby lee ramdass petitioner ronald angelone director virginia ment corrections writ certiorari appeals fourth circuit june justice concurring judgment simmons south carolina majority held state puts defendant future dangerousness issue available alternative sentence death life imprisonment without possibility parole due process entitles defendant inform capital sentencing jury parole ineligible concurring judgment see also plurality opinion due process requires defendant sentenced basis information opportunity deny explain concurring judgment quoting skipper south carolina accordingly state seeks demonstrate defendant poses future danger society allowed bring parole ineligibility jury attention means rebutting state case doubt simmons rightly decided case petitioner seeks writ habeas corpus rather vacatur sentence direct appeal scope review governed supp iii accordingly may grant relief virginia decision contrary involved unreasonable application clearly established federal law determined ibid see also williams taylor slip case holding simmons virginia concluded simmons inapplicable petitioner ineligible parole jury considering sentence ramdass commonwealth noted virginia law person convicted three separate felony offenses murder rape robbery presenting firearms deadly weapon shall eligible parole code ann explained ramdass parole ineligible time capital sentencing proceeding kayani murder conviction constitute third conviction purposes critically held although ramdass found guilty armed robbery domino pizza restaurant verdict count prior conviction judgment yet entered verdict time ramdass capital sentencing proceeding reasons explained plurality opinion virginia decision neither contrary unreasonable application holding simmons whether defendant entitled inform jury parole ineligible ultimately question federal law look state law determine defendant parole status simmons defendant conclusively establish ed parole ineligible time sentencing prosecution challenge question parole ineligibility ramdass however ineligible parole jury considered sentence relevant yet entered judgment conviction domino pizza robbery entry judgment purely ministerial act virginia law sense foreordained agree petitioner available alternative sentence death life imprisonment without possibility parole concurring judgment circumstances materially indistinguishable facts simmons see williams taylor supra slip therefore contrary simmons virginia hold petitioner entitled inform jury parole ineligible see ibid stands defendant parole ineligibility state law purely ministerial act simmons entitles defendant inform jury ineligibility either argument instruction even technically parole ineligible moment sentencing case however plurality opinion explains entry judgment following criminal conviction virginia state purely ministerial act one inevitable foreordained state law commonwealth allows criminal defendants file motions following guilty verdict trial courts may set aside jury verdicts response motions see ante thus matter virginia law guilty verdict inevitably lead entry judgment order consequently jury verdict finding petitioner guilty domino pizza robbery mean petitioner necessarily parole ineligible state law indeed petitioner concedes possibility domino pizza trial judge set aside verdict virginia rule brief petitioner petitioner nevertheless contends possibility trial set aside guilty verdict domino pizza robbery quite remote therefore entry judgment extremely likely plurality opinion explains simmons require courts estimate likelihood future contingencies concerning defendant parole ineligibility rather simmons entitles defendant inform capital sentencing jury parole ineligible alternative sentence death life without possibility parole unlike defendant simmons ramdass eligible parole state law time sentencing reasons agree petitioner entitled issuance writ habeas corpus decision williams taylor makes clear standard review dictated supp iii narrower applicable direct review applying standard believe virginia decision neither contrary unreasonable application holding simmons accordingly concur judgment bobby lee ramdass petitioner ronald angelone director virginia ment corrections writ certiorari appeals fourth circuit june justice stevens justice souter justice ginsburg justice breyer join dissenting acute unfairness permitting state rely recent conviction establish defendant future dangerousness simultaneously permitting state deny conviction defendant attempts argue parole ineligible therefore future danger even miserly reading opinions simmons south carolina supports conclusion petitioner denied ne hallmarks due process adversary system namely defendant right meet state case concurring judgment simmons held hen state seeks show defendant future dangerousness defendant allowed bring parole ineligibility jury attention way argument defense counsel instruction means responding state showing future dangerousness concurring judgment present case falls squarely within holding question commonwealth argued ramdass future dangerousness ante focused almost entirely ramdass extensive criminal history emphasizing recent crime spree committed mandatory release indeed prosecution relied upon domino pizza robbery crime virginia precluded ramdass relying upon establish parole also question ramdass denied opportunity inform jury parole ineligibility sentencing deliberations jury asked following question defendant given life possibility parole time natural death app rather giving kind straightforward answer rather permitting counsel explain petitioner parole ineligibility instructed ou impose punishment feel evidence concern may happen afterwards finally undisputed absence clear instruction made difference question demonstrates parole ineligibility important jury jury confused whether life sentence truly means life whether means life subject possibility parole see simmons concurring judgment hat jury case felt compelled ask whether parole available shows jurors know whether defendant released prison critically three jurors said jury knew ramdass never gotten prison given life rather death app two stated result among jurors beyond question information ibid told given answer perception paroled remanded reconsideration light simmons virginia held case apply ramdass ineligible parole jury considering sentence ramdass commonwealth applicable virginia statute requires three strikes defendant parole ineligible time jury considering ramdass penalty january held ramdass ineligible parole two strikes pizza hut robbery instant capital murder ibid ramdass robbery domino pizza count third strike even though jury case already found guilty technically state law count conviction virginia definition conviction guilty verdict rather conviction also requires piece paper signed judge entering verdict record trial judge signed entry judgment domino pizza case days end sentencing phase ramdass capital murder proceeding ante therefore virginia held time jury considering petitioner sentence capital murder case ramdass ineligible parole state law thus simmons inapplicable ii plurality begins stating thinks rule established simmons instruction required assuming jury fixes sentence life defendant ineligible parole state law ante plurality also adds proviso defendant must parole ineligible time given understanding plurality says aterial differences exist case simmons ante differences plurality points distinguish case simmons first asserted distinction virginia stated ramdass parole ineligible state law time sentencing ramdass might become parole ineligible later date exact moment jury deliberating yet trouble fact distinguishes ramdass case simmons simmons relevant parole statute code ann supp see simmons concurring judgment citing south carolina parole law see also plurality opinion statute south carolina board probation parole pardon services determined defendant parole eligibility determination come sentencing phase south carolina case law unambiguously stated eligibility determination made trial parole moreover statute required parole board find defendant prior convictions committed pursuant one continuous course conduct means certain board ultimately reach conclusion fact simmons state south carolina steadfastly maintained simmons truly parole ineligible time sentencing phase parole board determination yet therefore fact parole ineligibility state law determined time sentencing simply fact distinguishes simmons ramdass perhaps recognizing problem plurality shifts ground plurality says whether parole ineligibility state law determined time sentencing whether possibility parole eligibility time ante words plurality says simmons applies conclusive proof time sentencing defendant future inevitabl found parole ineligible ante ramdass case plurality continues inevitably parole ineligible virginia law domino pizza robbery verdict set aside virginia rule rule permits trial set aside guilty verdict days final judgment entered ante fact distinguishes ramdass case simmons like virginia south carolina permitted still permits entertain motions set aside verdict motion filed simmons availability procedure makes ramdass parole ineligibility less inevitable must also true accordingly mere availability procedure fact distinguishes two cases end though plurality really rest upon inevitability upon alleged lack inevitability represented motion procedure instead plurality relies upon fact time ramdass sentencing phase although jury rendered guilty verdict domino pizza robbery case trial judge yet entered judgment verdict ante entry judgment come days later ante distinction important plurality says judgment verdict usual measure finality trial ante whereas verdict without judgment uncertain ante plurality course correct missing entry judgment circumstance present simmons plurality entirely unsupported assertion entry judgment certain verdict flat wrong sole basis plurality conclusion domino pizza verdict uncertain possibility set aside rule rule guilty verdict may set aside even judgment entered see supra plurality cited single case suggesting standard setting aside verdict rule varies depending whether judgment entered accordingly verdict susceptible set aside rule less certain simply judgment entered verdict whatever degree uncertainty identical cases short whether judgment entered verdict absolutely bearing verdict uncertainty plurality cites virginia cases support argument rule puts verdict shaky ground ante authorities less overwhelming cases actually mention rule one dicta unpublished decision intermediate state four others make passing reference sort motion denied context reciting procedural history case another case also makes passing reference denial motion clear fact motion predicated new evidence basis rule motion see supra made four months verdict motion almost certainly based rule ultimately plurality points three cases demonstrate jury verdict uncertain unreliable judgment entered ante citing dowell commonwealth app mentioning rule smith commonwealth blair commonwealth cases hold however verdict without entry judgment may used purposes impeaching witness credibility may used purposes statute permitting removal public office person convicted act involving moral turpitude governor pardon prisoner verdict entry judgment one actually involves rule motion remotely says verdict unreliable plurality scrounges find case law support result barely registers radar screen furthermore plurality thinks authority proposition entry judgment generally considered ministerial matter ante related context however virginia observed rendition judgment distinguished entry records rendition judgment judicial act whereas entry judgment clerk records ministerial judicial act entry recordation instrument order book ministerial act clerk constitute integral part judgment rollins bazile citations internal quotation marks omitted event critical point made plurality distinction relying distinction plurality necessarily abandoning understanding simmons purports following explained extent availability rule motions undermines inevitability defendant prior verdicts therefore parole ineligibility state law whether judgment entered verdict simmons apply entry judgment answer simply state law time sentencing defendant inevitably found parole ineligible inevitability verdict undermined equally without judgment defendant eligible parole state law verdict set aside regardless whether set aside judgment entered fact though plurality really makes attempt explain distinction terms either rule terms rule rather significance entry judgment rests upon assertion judgment certain jury verdict line really relative degrees certainty regarding parole question one state law controls looking defendant conclusively determined status either time sentencing inevitably thereafter question simmons applicability must issue federal due process law proposition agree entirely indeed simmons makes perfectly clear discuss examining simmons due process requirements entail however important understand rationale behind simmons need capital sentencing juries accurate information defendant particular area parole eligibility iii stated gregg georgia experienced trial judge daily faces difficult task imposing sentences vital need accurate information defendant crime committed order able impose rational sentence typical criminal case accurate sentencing information indispensable prerequisite reasoned determination whether defendant shall live die jury people may never made sentencing decision joint opinion stewart powell stevens imperative critical jury must make determination future dangerousness sentencing authority must predict convicted person probable future conduct engages process determining sentence impose essential jury possible vant information individual defendant whose fate must determine jurek texas joint opinion stewart powell stevens comes issues future dangerousness possibility parole therefore vitally important jury accurate information defendant counsel aware including accurate statement potential sentencing alternative california ramos say course constitution compels tell jury every single piece information may relevant deliberations see indeed california ramos held ordinarily proper defe state choice substantive factors relevant penalty determination notwithstanding broad discretion recognized ramos latitude entitled unbounded times must give way demands due process one due process requirement defendant must opportunity rebut state case simmons concurring judgment hen state seeks show defendant future dangerousness fact never released prison often way violent criminal successfully rebut state case concurring judgment accordingly despite general deference state decisions regarding jury told sentencing due process requires defendant allowed bring parole ineligibility jury attention cases available alternative sentence death life imprisonment without possibility parole prosecution argues defendant pose threat society future ibid rationale simmons exception general rule ramos quite apparent ramos defendant claimed state permitted argue governor commute sentence life without parole due process entitled tell jury governor commute death sentence well rejected argument however holding information defendant sought introduce balance impact telling jury governor commute sentence life without parole make jury less inclined vote death penalty upon learning information ibid finally persuaded impermissibly impe jury toward voting death sentence jury told life without parole sentence commuted told death penalty commuted well factors however points precisely opposite direction comes information defendant parole ineligibility state argues defendant future danger society quite plainly rebuts argument point defendant parole ineligibility never part society simmons concurring judgment fact never released prison often rebut state case unlike ramos jury informed defendant parole ineligibility less inclined vote death penalty upon learning fact conversely permitting state argue defendant future dangerousness simultaneously precluding defendant arguing parole ineligibility tend impe jury toward voting death sentence despite plurality unsupported remark vidence potential parole ineligibility uncertain materiality ante available data demonstrate contrary long defendant remain jail critical factor juries one study example indicates virginia residents consider number years defendant might actually serve paroled important consideration choosing life imprisonment death penalty similar study reveals potential jurors think extremely important important know information deciding life imprisonment death likewise respondents another survey stated likely give life sentence instead death knew defendant serve least years prison parole general public support death penalty also plummets survey subjects given alternative life without indeed parole ineligibility information important potential virginia jurors actually disregard judge instructions consider parole eligibility determining defendant time recent development parole ineligibility statutes results confusion misperception common sense tells us many jurors might know whether life sentence carries possibility parole simmons concurring judgment statistical data bear one study potential virginia jurors asked person sentenced life imprisonment intentional murder armed robbery many years average think person actually serve released parole frequent response another survey put average response eight potential jurors think person sentenced life prison murder released point given data surprising one study concluded urors assessing dangerousness attach great weight defendant expected sentence death sentence imposed importantly jurors believe alternative death relatively short time prison tend sentence death jurors believe alternative treatment longer tend sentence life consequently every reason governor commutation power issue ramos required put jury leads precisely opposite conclusion comes issue parole ineligibility exactly simmons exception normally operative rule deference established plurality focusing exclusively one many sources cited criticizes length ante scientific conclusions merely confirm every sentencing judge surely knows soon defendant may actually released prison highly relevant sentencing decision plurality icism yet underscores formalistic character analysis issue presented case exercising judicial function times judgment far important technical iv virginia held whether simmons applies question whose answer entirely controlled operation state law see supra understanding adopted plurality well least originally stated holding simmons see supra explained virginia view well plurality original stance simply reconciled simmons might explain plurality ultimately abandons view instead relying assessment probable defendant found parole ineligible plurality might put certain state law plurality correct reject virginia holding state law entirely controls applicability simmons simmons announced rule due process state law plurality opinion concurring judgment say federal due process right simmons make reference state law surely reason simmons exception ramos consequences parole ineligibility state law thing saying precise technical operation state law entirely controls applicability simmons makes perfectly clear case south carolina argued future exigencies legislative reform commutation clemency escape might allow simmons released society simmons entitled inform jury parole ineligible plurality opinion indeed noted earlier argued simmons technically parole ineligible time sentencing state parole board yet made determination see supra yet plurality opinion rejected outright argument hypothetical future developments control issue finding south carolina argument state law technically true legally accurate little force simmons words due process standard simmons controlled entirely technical minutiae state law even though looked state law determining right rebut state argument triggered makes perfect sense simmons due process right make reference yet wholly controlled state law one hand simmons limited exception ramos confined defendant parole ineligible hence reference state law hand simmons constitutional requirement imposed applicability turned entirely defendant technical status state law time sentencing constitutional requirement easily evaded artful crafting state statute example virginia define conviction require entry judgment easily define conviction require final appeals exhausted state federal habeas options foreclosed delaying defendant convictions count strikes parole ineligibility purposes point time well capital murder sentencing phase state convert simmons requirement constitutional simmons applicability therefore question federal law case makes clear federal standard essentially disregards future hypothetical possibilities even might make defendant parole eligible question case boils whether plurality line entry judgment verdict demarcation simmons applicability consistent simmons realistic accurate assessment probabilities workable clear rule believe plurality fails score important emphasize precise basis uncertainty plurality perceives plurality limits relevant uncertainty things known time sentencing events developing day sentencing might lend uncertainty defendant eventual parole ineligibility make simmons inapplicable plurality says ante understand plurality concerned whether facts known prior sentencing cast doubt whether sentencing defendant become parole ineligible even nothing definitive happened yet time sentencing facts known time might well give rise uncertainty defendant parole ineligibility question facts known time ramdass sentencing might cast doubt whether found parole ineligible sentencing facts plurality points first judgment yet entered verdict second verdict set aside ramdass filed motion set aside verdict rule trial found motion meritorious motion set aside verdict filed pending legal basis granting motion ever identified slightest indication domino pizza robbery trial motion found meritorious filed short plurality finds constitutionally significant uncertainty hypothetical possibility motion filed might identified trial error possibly found claim meritorious mere availability procedure setting aside verdict necessary defendant parole ineligibility enough plurality says make simmons inapplicable frankly see simmons found inapplicable basis hypothetical future developmen plurality opinion plurality offers evidence whatsoever possibility wrapped might inside possibly likely occur hypothetical future developments simmons refused countenance possibility setting aside verdict likely fanciful scenarios dismissed simmons certainty diminished merely trial judge yet entered judgment fact bearing whether rule motion granted plurality never tells us simply declares without support elaboration explanation verdict uncertain judgment see supra son suggests verdict uncertain rather remarkable ramdass said plurality relies upon fact convicted murderer minimal education history drug experimentation including pcp cocaine app said know asked ever released prison ante evidence thinner plurality assessment certainties internally inconsistent explained earlier standard setting aside verdict regardless whether judgment entered accordingly verdict uncertain domino pizza case also true pizza hut conviction time sentencing hearing capital murder case deadline filing motion rule expired either domino pizza verdict pizza hut conviction time filing motion pizza hut conviction expired february days judgment entered verdict days sentencing phase capital murder case ended possibility pizza hut conviction set aside judgment entered domino pizza verdict therefore ramdass technically became parole ineligible certainty verdict much doubt conviction plurality however finds domino pizza verdict uncertain yet casts doubt pizza hut conviction possibly consistent plurality never says finally plurality approach entirely boundless kind hypothetical future developmen issue sufficient make simmons inapplicable sufficient rather possibility recent conviction set aside motion old prior conviction set aside appeal judgment entered domino pizza verdict state postconviction habeas procedure point mere availability procedure set aside verdict enough true well mere availability appeal state habeas review long time expired either old convictions necessary defendant parole ineligibility set aside procedures well procedure prior convictions potentially set aside crucial easy case distracted lack entry judgment recentness ramdass prior convictions examples demonstrate however facts tend detract rather elucidate relevant issue simmons inapplicable least one defendant prior convictions set aside sentencing third strike becomes final whatever time plurality might think crucial moment matter reasoning whether set aside motion appeal state federal postconviction relief plurality reasoning hold true long procedures simply available accordingly matter whether defendant prior strikes day old year old years old matter judgment entered prior convictions long procedures setting aside old convictions exist remain technically available prior defendant capital murder sentencing phase defendant eventual parole ineligibility uncertain crucial moment plurality however never addresses surely holding today invitation possibilities indeed possibilities make simmons inapplicable invite circumvention simmons result rule turned entirely state law see supra allowing state render prior convictions uncertain simply holding open theoretical possibility postconviction relief times given appeals various forms postconviction relief undermine certainty verdict conviction every bit much procedure like rule indeed probably plurality reasoning either draws arbitrary line types procedures accepts possibilities make simmons inapplicable case due process right eviscerated abundantly clear proclaimed workable rule plurality claims following illusion ante arbitrary necessary decide case entirely sufficient simply hold virginia offered one reason doubting judgment entered domino pizza robbery verdict doubting ramdass eventual parole ineligibility certainly offered reason thinking possibility setting aside domino pizza robbery verdict likely hypothetical future developments rejected simmons case thus falls squarely within simmons though unnecessary decide guilty verdict proper line guilty verdict defendant natural breaking point uncertainties inherent trial process time burden state prove accused guilt beyond reasonable doubt guilty verdict however means defendant presumption innocence attendant trial safeguards overcome verdict resolves central question general issue guilt marks significant point adversary proceeding reflects fundamental shift probabilities regarding defendant fate reason proper point line separating hypothetical probable drawn moreover state use defendant prior crimes argue future dangerousness jury rendered verdict virginia see supra also point defendant simmons right attach williams taylor opinion slip stated standard granting habeas relief decision certainly contrary clearly established precedent state applies rule contradicts governing law set forth cases explained virginia applied simmons applicability controlled entirely state law defendant parole ineligibility determined exact moment sentencing phase occurs see supra state law control simmons applicability due process right turn whether defendant already found parole ineligible exact moment sentencing simmons makes entirely clear aspects virginia holding applied rule contradicts governing law set forth simmons also held williams decision also contrary clearly established precedent state confronts set facts materially indistinguishable decision nevertheless arrives result different precedent slip virginia decision also contrary simmons respect hypothetical future developments rejected simmons materially indistinguishable future possibility virginia decision contrary simmons even assuming correct rule applied virginia decision unreasonable application simmons held pizza hut conviction count strike domino pizza robbery verdict distinction lack entry judgment reason matters verdict may set aside motion possibility remains identical crimes disregard one hypothetical possibilities based distinction absolutely relevance probability verdict set aside unreasonable application vi nothing arguments distract us fact simple case question turns whether hypothetical possibility trial judge might fail sign piece paper entering judgment guilty verdict mean defendant precluded arguing parole ineligibility jury also distracted plurality red herring possibility setting aside verdict motion possibility indistinguishable nonexhaustive list hypothetical future possibilities dismissed simmons also fails distinguish case many possibilities part state criminal justice system fails distinguish ramdass convictions plurality convoluted understanding simmons diverse implications necessitate fair amount disentangling argument divert us plain reality case juries want know parole ineligibility know important life death decisionmaking know misinformed likely give information know simmons know wholeheartedly embraced moreover know jury thought information critical know jury misunderstood life sentence meant know jury recommended life instead death known ramdass parole ineligible know jury get clear answer question also know virginia entrusts jury solemn duty recommending life death defendant insist constitution permits wool pulled eyes respectfully dissent footnotes prosecution opening argument began recounting ramdass entire criminal history app eight nine witnesses commonwealth called little relate details ramdass criminal past prosecution closing argument highlighted connection ramdass crimes prior releases prison fact several occasions ramdass served time strong arm robbery conviction finally paroled may ramdass released mandatory parole shortly recent crime spree began describing ramdass release mandatory parole next night august robbery domino pizza alexandria well cab driver shot head august domino pizza august day august robbed domino pizza point gun alexandria robbed domino pizza long shot arlington cab driver head course simmons south carolina applies prosecution argues future dangerousness require state argue particular past crime purpose pointing virginia reliance domino pizza verdict underscore unfairness permitting virginia use denying ramdass use plurality repeated statement virginia brought crime rather case chief ante neither means simmons inapplicable mitigates unfairness signals formalism plurality prepared endorse simmons applicability turn whether kind evidence exists point emphasize real simmons concerns plurality complains essence evidence came form uncontested proffer rather sworn affidavit ante neither simmons applicability reality case undercut quibble thing proves plurality penchant formalism though plurality include proviso initial statement rule simmons repeats requirement less times opinion see ante jury considered case time capital sentencing trial time jury death penalty deliberations jury considering sentence time sentencing trial time trial time sentencing time jury future dangerousness deliberations jury deliberated sentence time sentencing trial jury considered sentence time sentencing time sentencing trial time sentencing trial time sentencing trial time trial time trial time trial statute read part board must grant parole parole authorized prisoner serving sentence second subsequent conviction following separate sentencing prior conviction violent crimes defined section provided one included offense shall committed within period pursuant one continuous course conduct multiple offenses must treated purposes section one offense see state mckay true plurality points ante simmons defendant entry judgment plurality reasoning issue whether defendant parole ineligible time sentencing ineligible thus whether defendant parole eligible time entry judgment parole board yet met hardly relevant distinction material one first foremost time trial state agency ever determined simmons going serving sentence life without possibility parole despite fact earlier pled guilty sentenced violent crime prior trial importance distinction power make determination rest judiciary solely vested executive branch agency south carolina board probation parole pardon services brief respondent simmons south carolina emphasis added plurality also complains state need glean information record simmons ante true equally true state pretend fact creates material distinction simply expressly raised rejected moreover evident opinion simmons status definitively legally determined yet time sentencing see infra plurality contends simmons defendant conclusively established parole ineligibility time sentencing ante quoting simmons plurality opinion see also ante simmons fact said one questioned defendant facts necessary found ineligible future date indicate legal determination defendant parole ineligibility already definitively made parole board clear plurality citation south carolina parole statute defendant parole status determined parole board later date see supra also clear fact plurality relied upon testimony parole board attorneys demonstrating plurality recognition parole board ultimately determine simmons parole eligibility furthermore plurality statement simmons fact ineligible emphasis added opposed legally ineligible ineligible matter law clearly distinguished facts known time indicated simmons status likelihood ultimately determined legal determination status formally determined later date finally simmons parole ineligibility legally conclusively resolved time trial need plurality discuss reject possibilities might undermined simmons eventual finding parole ineligibility see infra simmons plurality say instruction informing jury petitioner ineligible parole legally accurate ante next sentence plurality wrote certainly instruction accurate instruction emphasis added made clear accuracy sense used relative term absolute conclusive determination legal status time ramdass trial rule read motion set aside jury returns verdict guilty may motion accused made later days entry final order set aside verdict error committed trial evidence insufficient matter law sustain conviction south carolina rule criminal procedure reads relevant part motion new trial based evidence must made within reasonable period time discovery evidence true course motion new trial south carolina rule must predicated discovery new evidence meaningfully distinguish rule virginia rule verdict set aside trial error insufficient evidence plurality says simmons pleaded guilty prior crime foreclosed filing motion south carolina rule ante proposition plurality cites whetsell state flat wrong see johnson catoe whetsell stand proposition defendant admits guilt barred collaterally attacking conviction whetsell stands narrow proposition pcr postconviction relief applicant pled guilty advice counsel satisfy prejudice prong collateral attack pled guilty event dowell commonwealth app davis commonwealth wl va unpublished see davis wl floyd commonwealth overruling floyd motions set aside verdicts trial entered judgments verdicts johnson commonwealth app johnson sentencing hearing defense counsel made motion set aside verdict trial judge denied motion walker commonwealth app jury discharged defendant moved set aside verdict denied motion carter commonwealth app carter appeals judgments circuit loudoun county denied motions new trial payne commonwealth dowell say verdict without judgment reliable impeachment purposes va far cry saying verdict unreliable three cases actually address question whether verdict conviction state law say depends context answering negative two cases affirmative third plurality also cites two intermediate cases making passing reference trial granting motion though neither case mentions rule see gorham commonwealth app cullen commonwealth app mere two cases among criminal cases virginia surely demonstrates setting aside verdict motion rarity two instances make verdict uncertain one might well cite solitary case governor granted pardon verdict entry judgment see blair commonwealth though plurality insists judgment usual measure finality ante opinion reveals mean finality absolute sense rather concedes jury verdict uncertain ante even judgment uncertain availability postjudgment relief ante means though particularly candid judgment certain verdict put differently plurality thinks judgment enduring greater probability verdict survive motion set aside already entry judgment clear significance entry judgment plurality must based belief significance without entry judgment defendant ineligible parole exact moment sentencing explained fact dispositive see supra significance without entry judgment parole status inevitable also explained entry judgment significance insofar inevitability concerned see supra see note meaning life virginia jurors effect reliability capital sentencing rev citing study national legal research group hughes informing south carolina capital juries parole rev citing study univ south carolina institute public affairs see also simmons plurality opinion discussing study paduano smith deathly errors juror misperceptions concerning parole imposition death penalty colum human rights rev see rising doubts death penalty usa today nationwide gallup poll finds support death penalty support death penalty life without parole offered option finn given choice va juries vote life washington post pp according poll conducted death penalty information center opposes capital punishment support death penalty nationwide falls percent percent alternative life without parole accompanied restitution heyser death penalty rise virginia roanoke times reporting study virginia tech center survey research finding virginians strongly somewhat support death penalty figure drops respondents given alternative life without parole years plus restitution armstrong mills death penalty support erodes many back life term alternative chicago tribune mar illinois registered voters support death penalty favor death given option life without parole see note see see paduano smith colum human rights see hughes see also finn washington post nly percent americans believe convicted murderers spend rest days prison see eisenberg wells deadly confusion juror instructions capital cases cornell rev see simmons plurality opinion discussing data specific criticisms plurality first complains surveys inadmissible evidence question though whether statistical studies admissible evidence whether relevant facts assisting determination proper scope simmons due process right surely event ramdass raise studies sentencing hearing see app virginia chance object opted far late day complain simmons incidentally also introduced similar evidence trial without objection see plurality opinion next plurality says one studies cited focused georgia jurors georgians unique preference life without parole event studies focusing virginia jurors yield results see nn supra finally plurality questions objectivity one particular study even plurality justified criticism surely basis questioning many sources cited see supra univ south carolina institute public affairs gallup poll virginia tech center survey research study associate professor statistics dept economic social statistics cornell justice concurring opinion make direct reference hypothetical possibilities south carolina brief plurality opinion put issue squarely hypotheticals made difference outcome case concurring opinion precisely opposite true even one accepts premise simmons requires us presume recent conviction ultimately count strike regardless happen state law sentencing hearing virginia apparently adopted view explains counted capital murder verdict strike time sentencing hearing even though judgment yet entered verdict see supra even accepting premise delaying determination parole ineligibility status sentencing hearing still mean defendant prior convictions count strikes well capital murder sentencing phase plurality claim ante ramdass seeks extension simmons therefore unfounded criticism etitioner proposed rule require courts evaluate probability future events ignores fact simmons thing ante irony comment moreover criticizes rule requiring assessment future ground inquiry inherently speculative yet speculation future precisely required jury asked assess defendant future dangerousness speculation however becomes reasoned prediction rather arbitrary guesswork jury permitted learn defendant future parole status see supra unfortunately case plurality also attempts distinguish hypotheticals simmons ramdass case pointing former hypotheticals happened sentencing ante entire point hypotheticals whether occur sentencing whether occur defendant technically declared parole ineligible simmons true right parole board made determination simply nuances state law may create opportunity undermining parole ineligibility earlier make possibility less hypothetical undermine ineligibility less principle work either way true old convictions like pizza hut conviction entry judgment thus count strikes state law defendant must three strikes time parole ineligible strike set aside defendant three much parole eligible judgment never entered verdict plurality says state entitled deference context parole laws determining best reference point making ineligibility determination ante see also ante may take different approaches see support rule require state declare conviction final purposes statute verdict rendered questions whether federal due process standard must abide every distinction abiding distinction arbitrary light fact distinction absolutely bearing whether verdict set aside three remaining points addressed first teague lane bar relief teague antiretroactivity doctrine irrelevant simmons decided ramdass conviction became final see case teague bar applying new rules federal habeas review barrier ramdass case falls squarely within simmons case controls entirely new rule necessary second point concerns plurality suggestion ramdass might waived simmons claim see ante necessary discuss issue length suffices note precisely argument virginia raised remand virginia persuaded argument entire state federal habeas proceedings see app magistrate report discussing courts rejection waiver argument case therefore surprising virginia failed argue waiver brief opposition arguments raised therein normally deemed waived see caterpillar lewis finally ramdass counsel argued go jail rest life satisfy simmons requirement ante entire point simmons jury often misunderstand means sentence defendant life consequently ramdass able tell jury get life simply help unless also permitted tell jury life means life without possibility parole indeed fact jury question came counsel made argument demonstrates jury uncertain statement meant see finn washington post recounting virginia adopted life without parole alternative simmons number people given death sentence virginia plummeted describing imilar declines georgia well maryland see yarbrough commonwealth extending simmons apply even state argue future dangerousness ante