kansas
carr
argued
october
decided
january
kansas
jury
sentenced
respondent
sidney
gleason
death
killing
boyfriend
cover
robbery
elderly
man
kansas
jury
sentenced
respondents
reginald
jonathan
carr
brothers
death
joint
sentencing
proceeding
respondents
convicted
various
charges
stemming
notorious
crime
spree
culminated
brutal
rape
robbery
kidnaping
shooting
five
young
men
women
kansas
vacated
death
sentences
case
holding
sentencing
instructions
violated
eighth
amendment
failing
affirmatively
inform
jury
mitigating
circumstances
need
proved
satisfaction
individual
juror
juror
sentencing
decision
beyond
reasonable
doubt
also
held
carrs
eighth
amendment
right
individualized
capital
sentencing
determination
violated
trial
failure
sever
sentencing
proceedings
held
eighth
amendment
require
courts
instruct
jury
mitigating
circumstances
need
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
pp
kansas
left
doubt
ruling
based
federal
constitution
gleason
initial
argument
lacks
jurisdiction
hear
case
state
decision
rested
adequate
independent
grounds
rejected
see
kansas
marsh
pp
case
law
support
requiring
instruct
jury
mitigating
circumstances
need
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
see
buchanan
angelone
instruction
constitutionally
necessary
particular
cases
avoid
confusion
ambiguity
instructions
gives
rise
constitutional
error
reasonable
likelihood
jury
applied
challenged
instruction
way
prevents
consideration
constitutionally
relevant
evidence
boyde
california
bar
cleared
even
assuming
unconstitutional
require
defense
prove
mitigating
circumstances
beyond
reasonable
doubt
record
belies
defendants
contention
instructions
caused
jurors
apply
standard
proof
instructions
make
clear
existence
aggravating
circumstances
conclusion
outweigh
mitigating
circumstances
must
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
mitigating
circumstances
must
merely
found
exist
suggest
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
juror
reasonably
speculated
beyond
reasonable
doubt
correct
burden
mitigating
circumstances
pp
constitution
require
severance
carrs
joint
sentencing
proceedings
eighth
amendment
inapposite
defendant
claim
bottom
evidence
improperly
admitted
proceeding
question
whether
allegedly
improper
evidence
infected
sentencing
proceeding
unfairness
render
jury
imposition
death
penalty
denial
due
process
romano
oklahoma
light
evidence
presented
guilt
penalty
phases
relevant
jury
sentencing
determination
contention
admission
mitigating
evidence
one
carr
brother
infected
jury
consideration
sentence
amount
denial
due
process
beyond
pale
presumes
jury
followed
instructions
give
separate
consideration
defendant
bruton
distinguished
joint
proceedings
permissible
often
preferable
joined
defendants
criminal
conduct
arises
single
chain
events
buchanan
kentucky
limiting
instructions
like
given
carrs
proceeding
often
suffice
cure
risk
prejudice
zafiro
might
arise
codefendants
antagonistic
mitigation
theories
improper
vacate
death
sentence
based
pure
speculation
fundamental
unfairness
rather
reasoned
judgment
romano
supra
extravagant
speculation
lead
conclusion
supposedly
prejudicial
evidence
rendered
carr
brothers
joint
sentencing
proceeding
fundamentally
unfair
acts
almost
inconceivable
cruelty
depravity
described
excruciating
detail
sole
survivor
two
days
relived
wichita
massacre
jury
pp
reversed
remanded
scalia
delivered
opinion
roberts
kennedy
thomas
ginsburg
breyer
alito
kagan
joined
sotomayor
filed
dissenting
opinion
opinion
notice
opinion
subject
formal
revision
publication
preliminary
print
reports
readers
requested
notify
reporter
decisions
washington
typographical
formal
errors
order
corrections
may
made
preliminary
print
goes
press
nos
writs
certiorari
kansas
january
justice
scalia
delivered
opinion
kansas
vacated
death
sentences
sidney
gleason
brothers
reginald
jonathan
carr
gleason
killed
one
boyfriend
cover
robbery
elderly
man
carrs
notorious
wichita
crime
spree
culminated
brutal
rape
robbery
kidnaping
shooting
five
young
men
women
first
consider
whether
constitution
required
sentencing
courts
instruct
juries
mitigating
circumstances
need
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
second
whether
constitution
required
severance
carrs
joint
sentencing
proceedings
less
one
month
sidney
gleason
paroled
sentence
attempted
voluntary
manslaughter
joined
conspiracy
rob
elderly
man
gleason
companion
cut
elderly
man
get
box
cigarettes
fearing
female
snitch
gleason
cousin
damien
thompson
set
kill
mikiala
martinez
gleason
shot
killed
martinez
boyfriend
gleason
thompson
drove
martinez
rural
location
thompson
strangled
five
minutes
shot
chest
gleason
standing
providing
gun
final
shot
state
ultimately
charged
gleason
capital
murder
killing
martinez
boyfriend
premeditated
murder
boyfriend
aggravating
kidnaping
martinez
attempted
murder
aggravated
robbery
elderly
man
criminal
possession
firearm
convicted
counts
except
attempted
murder
charge
jury
also
found
state
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
existence
four
aggravating
circumstances
unanimously
agreed
sentence
death
december
brothers
reginald
jonathan
carr
set
crime
spree
culminating
wichita
night
december
reginald
carr
unknown
man
carjacked
andrew
schreiber
held
gun
head
forced
make
cash
withdrawals
various
atms
night
december
brothers
followed
linda
ann
walenta
cellist
wichita
symphony
home
orchestra
practice
one
approached
vehicle
said
needed
help
rolled
window
pointed
gun
head
shifted
reverse
escape
shot
three
times
ran
back
brother
car
fled
scene
one
gunshots
severed
walenta
spine
died
one
month
later
result
injuries
night
december
brothers
burst
triplex
birchwood
roommates
jason
brad
aaron
lived
jason
girlfriend
holly
heather
friend
aaron
also
house
armed
handguns
golf
club
brothers
forced
five
jason
bedroom
demanded
strip
naked
later
ordered
bedroom
closet
took
holly
heather
bedroom
demanded
perform
oral
sex
digitally
penetrate
carrs
looked
barked
orders
forced
men
sex
holly
heather
yelled
men
shot
sex
women
holly
fearing
jason
life
performed
oral
sex
closet
ordered
brothers
jonathan
snatched
holly
closet
ordered
digitally
penetrate
set
gun
knees
floor
raped
raped
heather
reginald
took
brad
jason
holly
aaron
various
atms
withdraw
cash
victims
returned
house
torture
continued
holly
closet
fright
jonathan
found
engagement
ring
hidden
bedroom
jason
keeping
surprise
holly
pointing
gun
jason
jason
identify
ring
holly
sitting
nearby
closet
reginald
took
holly
closet
said
going
shoot
yet
raped
floor
strewn
boxes
christmas
decorations
forced
turn
around
ejaculated
mouth
forced
swallow
nearby
bathroom
jonathan
raped
heather
raped
holly
three
hours
mayhem
began
brothers
decided
time
leave
house
attempted
put
five
victims
trunk
aaron
honda
civic
finding
fit
jammed
three
young
men
trunk
directed
heather
front
car
holly
jason
pickup
truck
driven
reginald
vehicles
arrived
field
instructed
jason
brad
still
naked
aaron
kneel
snow
holly
cried
oh
god
going
shoot
us
holly
heather
ordered
kneel
snow
holly
went
jason
side
heather
aaron
holly
heard
first
shot
heard
aaron
plead
brothers
shoot
heard
second
shot
heard
screams
heard
third
shot
fourth
felt
blow
fifth
shot
head
remained
kneeling
kicked
fall
snow
ran
pickup
truck
survived
hair
clip
fastened
hair
night
deflected
bullet
went
jason
took
sweater
scrap
clothing
brothers
let
wear
tied
around
head
stop
bleeding
eye
rushed
brad
aaron
heather
spotting
house
white
christmas
lights
distance
holly
started
running
toward
help
naked
skull
shattered
without
shoes
snow
fences
time
car
passed
nearby
road
feared
brothers
returning
camouflaged
lying
snow
made
house
rang
doorbell
knocked
man
opened
door
relayed
quickly
events
night
minutes
later
dispatcher
fearing
live
holly
lived
retold
night
events
jury
investigators
also
testified
brothers
returned
birchwood
house
leaving
five
friends
dead
ransacked
place
valuables
good
measure
beat
holly
dog
nikki
death
golf
club
state
charged
brothers
counts
including
murder
rape
sodomy
kidnaping
burglary
robbery
jury
returned
separate
guilty
verdicts
convicted
reginald
one
count
kidnaping
aggravated
robbery
aggravated
battery
criminal
damage
property
schreiber
carjacking
one
count
felony
murder
walenta
shooting
jonathan
acquitted
counts
related
schreiber
carjacking
convicted
felony
murder
walenta
shooting
birchwood
murders
jury
convicted
brother
counts
capital
murder
count
attempted
murder
counts
aggravated
kidnaping
counts
aggravated
robbery
counts
rape
attempted
rape
counts
aggravated
criminal
sodomy
count
aggravated
burglary
burglary
count
theft
count
cruelty
animals
jury
also
convicted
reginald
three
counts
unlawful
possession
firearm
state
sought
death
penalty
four
birchwood
murders
brothers
sentenced
together
state
relied
evidence
including
holly
two
days
testimony
evidence
four
aggravating
circumstances
defendants
knowingly
purposely
killed
created
great
risk
death
one
person
committed
crimes
purpose
receiving
money
items
monetary
value
committed
crimes
prevent
arrest
prosecution
committed
crimes
especially
heinous
atrocious
cruel
manner
hearing
brother
case
mitigation
jury
issued
separate
verdicts
death
reginald
jonathan
found
unanimously
state
proved
existence
four
aggravating
circumstances
beyond
reasonable
doubt
aggravating
circumstances
outweighed
mitigating
circumstances
justifying
four
separate
verdicts
death
brother
murders
jason
brad
aaron
heather
app
pp
kansas
vacated
death
penalties
cases
held
instructions
used
gleason
carrs
sentencing
violated
eighth
amendment
failed
affirmatively
inform
jury
mitigating
circumstances
need
proved
satisfaction
individual
juror
juror
sentencing
decision
beyond
reasonable
doubt
gleason
reginald
carr
jonathan
carr
without
instruction
according
jury
left
speculate
correct
burden
proof
mitigating
circumstances
reasonable
jurors
might
believed
consider
mitigating
circumstances
proven
beyond
reasonable
doubt
concluded
might
caused
jurors
exclude
relevant
mitigating
evidence
consideration
ibid
kansas
also
held
carrs
death
sentences
vacated
trial
failure
sever
sentencing
proceedings
thereby
violating
brothers
eighth
amendment
right
individualized
capital
sentencing
determination
according
joint
trial
inhibited
jury
individualized
consideration
jonathan
family
characteristics
tending
demonstrate
future
dangerousness
shared
brother
brother
visible
handcuffs
prejudiced
jury
consideration
sentence
reginald
prejudiced
according
kansas
jonathan
portrayal
corrupting
older
brother
moreover
reginald
prejudiced
brother
sister
testified
thought
reginald
admitted
shooter
later
backtracked
testified
remember
know
shot
ibid
kansas
opined
presumption
jury
followed
instructions
consider
defendant
separately
defeated
logic
defendants
joint
upbringing
maelstrom
family
influence
interactions
one
another
simply
amenable
orderly
separation
analysis
kansas
found
unable
say
death
verdict
unattributable
least
part
error
granted
certiorari
ii
first
turn
kansas
contention
eighth
amendment
required
courts
instruct
jury
mitigating
circumstances
need
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
considering
merits
contention
consider
gleason
challenge
jurisdiction
according
gleason
kansas
decision
rests
adequate
independent
grounds
argument
familiar
one
rejected
kansas
marsh
like
defendant
case
gleason
urges
decision
rests
rule
kansas
law
announced
state
kleypas
per
curiam
rule
later
reiterated
state
scott
per
curiam
stated
marsh
kleypas
rested
federal
law
relevant
passage
scott
rested
kleypas
discussion
constitutional
rule
jurors
need
agree
mitigating
circumstances
see
scott
supra
kansas
opinion
case
acknowledged
much
saying
statements
kleypas
implicate
broader
eighth
amendment
principle
prohibiting
barriers
preclude
sentencer
consideration
relevant
mitigating
evidence
kansas
opinion
leaves
room
doubt
relying
federal
constitution
stated
instruction
required
protects
capital
defendant
eighth
amendment
right
individualized
sentencing
absence
instruction
implicat
ed
gleason
right
individualized
sentencing
eighth
amendment
vacatur
gleason
death
sentence
onsequen
ce
eighth
amendment
error
emphasis
added
reason
criticism
leveled
dissent
misdirected
generally
none
business
kansas
vacated
gleason
carrs
death
sentences
grounds
marsh
scalia
concurring
decidedly
kansas
time
invalidates
death
sentences
says
federal
constitution
requires
review
far
undermining
state
autonomy
possible
way
vindicate
ibid
correct
state
federal
errors
return
power
state
people
ibid
state
courts
may
experiment
want
constitutions
often
wake
decisions
see
sutton
san
antonio
independent
school
district
rodriguez
aftermath
rev
state
experiment
federal
constitution
expect
elude
review
long
victory
goes
criminal
defendant
turning
blind
eye
cases
change
uniform
land
crazy
quilt
marsh
supra
enable
state
courts
blame
unpopular
reprieve
horrible
criminals
upon
federal
constitution
fact
turn
merits
kansas
conclusion
eighth
amendment
requires
courts
kansas
affirmatively
inform
jury
mitigating
circumstances
need
proven
beyond
reasonable
doubt
approaching
question
abstract
without
reference
case
law
doubt
whether
even
possible
apply
standard
proof
determination
selection
phase
proceeding
possible
determination
eligibility
phase
purely
factual
determination
facts
justifying
death
set
forth
kansas
statute
either
exist
one
require
finding
exist
made
beyond
reasonable
doubt
whether
mitigation
exists
however
largely
judgment
call
perhaps
value
call
one
juror
might
consider
mitigating
another
might
course
ultimate
question
whether
mitigating
circumstances
outweigh
aggravating
circumstances
mostly
question
mercy
quality
know
strained
mean
nothing
think
tell
jury
defendants
must
deserve
mercy
beyond
reasonable
doubt
must
deserve
possible
course
instruct
jury
facts
establishing
mitigating
circumstances
need
proved
preponderance
leaving
judgment
whether
facts
indeed
mitigating
whether
outweigh
aggravators
jury
discretion
without
standard
proof
hold
constitution
requires
determination
divided
factual
component
judgmental
component
former
accorded
instruction
doubt
whether
produce
anything
jury
confusion
last
analysis
jurors
accord
mercy
deem
appropriate
withhold
mercy
case
law
designed
achieve
event
case
law
require
capital
sentencing
courts
affirmatively
inform
jury
mitigating
circumstances
need
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
ibid
buchanan
angelone
upheld
death
sentence
even
though
trial
failed
provide
jury
express
guidance
concept
mitigation
likewise
weeks
angelone
reaffirmed
never
held
state
must
structure
particular
way
manner
juries
consider
mitigating
evidence
rejected
contention
constitutionally
deficient
instruct
jurors
mitigating
circumstance
find
evidence
support
without
additional
guidance
equally
unavailing
contention
even
instruction
mitigating
evidence
need
proven
beyond
reasonable
doubt
always
required
constitutionally
necessary
cases
avoid
confusion
ambiguity
instructions
gives
rise
constitutional
error
reasonable
likelihood
jury
applied
challenged
instruction
way
prevents
consideration
constitutionally
relevant
evidence
boyde
california
emphasis
added
alleged
confusion
stemming
jury
instructions
used
defendants
sentencings
clear
bar
meager
possibility
confusion
enough
ibid
initial
matter
defendants
argument
rests
assumption
unconstitutional
require
defense
prove
mitigating
circumstances
beyond
reasonable
doubt
assuming
without
deciding
case
record
belies
defendants
contention
instructions
caused
jurors
apply
standard
proof
defendants
focus
upon
following
instruction
state
burden
prove
beyond
reasonable
doubt
one
aggravating
circumstances
outweighed
mitigating
circumstances
found
exist
app
pet
cert
instr
juxtaposition
aggravating
mitigating
circumstances
goes
argument
caused
jury
speculate
mitigating
circumstances
must
also
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
seems
us
quite
opposite
instruction
makes
clear
existence
aggravating
circumstances
conclusion
outweigh
mitigating
circumstances
must
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
mitigating
circumstances
hand
must
merely
found
exist
description
mitigating
circumstances
found
exist
contained
three
instructions
app
pet
cert
instrs
emphasis
added
unsurprisingly
since
recites
kansas
statute
see
stat
ann
found
exist
certainly
suggest
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
instructions
whole
distinguish
clearly
aggravating
mitigating
circumstances
state
burden
prove
beyond
reasonable
doubt
one
aggravating
circumstances
jury
must
decide
unanimously
state
met
burden
app
pet
cert
instrs
emphasis
added
mitigating
circumstances
hand
need
found
members
jury
considered
individual
juror
arriving
sentencing
decision
instr
instructions
say
defense
counsel
bears
burden
proving
facts
constituting
mitigating
circumstance
beyond
reasonable
doubt
make
much
sense
since
one
mitigating
circumstances
curiously
mercy
simply
factual
determination
reject
kansas
decision
jurors
left
speculate
correct
burden
proof
mitigating
circumstances
reasons
described
juror
reasonably
speculated
mitigating
circumstances
must
proved
particular
standard
let
alone
beyond
reasonable
doubt
reality
jurors
pars
instructions
subtle
shades
meaning
way
lawyers
might
boyde
supra
instructions
repeatedly
told
jurors
consider
mitigating
factor
meaning
aspect
defendants
background
circumstances
offense
jurors
misunderstood
instructions
prevent
consideration
constitutionally
relevant
evidence
iii
turn
next
contention
joint
proceeding
carrs
cases
violated
defendants
eighth
amendment
right
individualized
sentencing
determination
kansas
agreed
defendants
joint
sentencing
proceeding
one
defendant
mitigating
evidence
put
thumb
death
scale
violation
eighth
amendment
rights
ibid
accepted
reginald
contention
prejudiced
brother
portrayal
corrupting
older
brother
agreed
reginald
prejudiced
brother
sister
equivocated
whether
reginald
admitted
shooter
reginald
abandoned
implausible
theory
prejudice
contends
state
likely
introduced
testimony
sentenced
alone
brief
respondent
jonathan
asserted
prejudiced
evidence
associating
dangerous
older
brother
caused
jury
perceive
incurable
speculate
evidence
assertedly
prejudicial
inadmissible
severed
proceedings
kansas
law
kansas
also
launched
broader
attack
joint
proceedings
contending
joinder
rendered
impossible
jury
consider
carrs
relative
moral
culpability
determine
individually
whether
entitled
mercy
whatever
merits
defendants
procedural
objections
shoehorn
eighth
amendment
prohibition
cruel
unusual
punishments
amicus
curiae
intimates
eighth
amendment
inapposite
defendant
claim
bottom
jury
considered
evidence
admitted
severed
proceeding
joint
trial
clouded
jury
consideration
mitigating
evidence
like
mercy
brief
held
romano
oklahoma
role
eighth
amendment
establish
special
federal
code
evidence
governing
admissibility
evidence
capital
sentencing
proceedings
rather
due
process
clause
wards
introduction
unduly
prejudicial
evidence
rende
trial
fundamentally
unfair
payne
tennessee
see
also
brown
sanders
test
prescribed
romano
constitutional
violation
attributable
evidence
improperly
admitted
proceeding
whether
evidence
infected
sentencing
proceeding
unfairness
render
jury
imposition
death
penalty
denial
due
process
mere
admission
evidence
might
otherwise
admitted
severed
proceeding
demand
automatic
vacatur
death
sentence
light
evidence
presented
guilt
penalty
phases
relevant
jury
sentencing
determination
contention
admission
mitigating
evidence
one
brother
infected
jury
consideration
sentence
amount
denial
due
process
beyond
pale
begin
instructed
jury
must
give
separate
consideration
defendant
entitled
sentence
decided
evidence
law
applicable
evidence
penalty
phase
limited
one
defendant
considered
defendant
app
pet
cert
instr
gave
instructions
aggravating
mitigating
circumstances
instrs
instructed
jury
consider
individual
particular
defendant
using
four
separate
verdict
forms
defendant
one
murdered
occupant
birchwood
house
instr
app
presume
jury
followed
instructions
considered
defendant
separately
deciding
impose
sentence
death
brutal
murders
romano
supra
contrary
conclusion
kansas
presumption
jurors
followed
instructions
defeated
logic
untenable
carrs
implausibly
liken
prejudice
resulting
joint
sentencing
proceeding
prejudice
infecting
joint
trial
bruton
prosecution
admitted
hearsay
evidence
codefendant
confession
implicating
defendant
particular
violation
defendant
confrontation
rights
incriminating
evidence
persuasive
sort
ineradicable
practical
matter
jury
mind
justified
described
narrow
departure
presumption
jurors
follow
instructions
richardson
marsh
declined
extend
exception
continued
apply
presumption
instructions
regarding
mitigating
evidence
proceedings
see
weeks
reason
think
jury
follow
instruction
consider
defendants
separately
case
joint
proceedings
permissible
often
preferable
joined
defendants
criminal
conduct
arises
single
chain
events
joint
trial
may
enable
jury
arrive
reliably
conclusions
regarding
guilt
innocence
particular
defendant
assign
fairly
respective
responsibilities
defendant
sentencing
buchanan
kentucky
codefendants
might
antagonistic
theories
mitigation
zafiro
suffice
overcome
kansas
interest
promoting
reliability
consistency
judicial
process
buchanan
supra
limiting
instructions
like
used
carrs
sentencing
proceeding
often
suffice
cure
risk
prejudice
zafiro
supra
citing
richardson
supra
forbid
joinder
proceedings
perversely
increase
odds
wanto
freakis
imposition
death
sentences
gregg
georgia
joint
opinion
stewart
powell
stevens
better
two
defendants
together
committed
crimes
placed
fates
determined
single
jury
improper
vacate
death
sentence
based
pure
speculation
fundamental
unfairness
rather
reasoned
judgment
romano
supra
extravagant
speculation
lead
conclusion
supposedly
prejudicial
evidence
rendered
carr
brothers
joint
sentencing
proceeding
fundamentally
unfair
beyond
reason
think
jury
death
verdicts
caused
identification
reginald
corrupter
jonathan
corrupted
jury
viewing
reginald
handcuffs
sister
retracted
statement
reginald
fired
final
shots
none
mattered
defendants
acts
almost
inconceivable
cruelty
depravity
described
excruciating
detail
holly
relived
jury
two
days
wichita
massacre
joint
sentencing
proceedings
render
sentencing
proceedings
fundamentally
unfair
iv
granted
state
petition
writ
certiorari
carrs
cases
declined
review
whether
confrontation
clause
amdt
requires
defendants
allowed
witnesses
whose
statements
recorded
police
reports
referred
state
proceedings
kansas
make
admission
statements
basis
vacating
death
sentences
merely
caution
ed
resentencing
proceedings
testimonial
statements
omitted
confident
regarding
police
reports
slightest
effect
upon
sentences
see
delaware
van
arsdall
judgments
kansas
reversed
cases
remanded
proceedings
inconsistent
opinion
ordered
sotomayor
dissenting
notice
opinion
subject
formal
revision
publication
preliminary
print
reports
readers
requested
notify
reporter
decisions
washington
typographical
formal
errors
order
corrections
may
made
preliminary
print
goes
press
nos
writs
certiorari
kansas
january
justice
sotomayor
dissenting
respectfully
dissent
believe
cases
ever
reviewed
see
reason
intervene
cases
like
plenty
reasons
kansas
violated
federal
constitutional
right
anything
state
overprotected
citizens
based
interpretation
state
federal
law
reasons
ably
articulated
predecessors
colleagues
worry
cases
like
prevent
serving
necessary
laboratories
experimenting
best
guarantee
defendants
fair
trial
dismiss
writs
improvidently
granted
kansas
vacated
three
death
sentences
sentences
sidney
gleason
carr
brothers
reginald
jonathan
constitutional
errors
penalty
phases
trials
three
men
tried
jury
instructions
include
language
previously
mandated
kansas
instructions
state
kansas
statutory
scheme
mitigating
circumstances
need
proven
individual
juror
satisfaction
beyond
reasonable
doubt
sidney
gleason
reginald
carr
jonathan
carr
found
instructions
therefore
undermined
kansas
state
law
created
reasonable
likelihood
jury
applied
challenged
instruction
way
prevents
consideration
mitigating
evidence
required
federal
constitution
quoting
boyde
california
kansas
also
vacated
carr
brothers
death
sentences
jointly
tried
penalty
phase
concluded
brother
particular
case
mitigation
compromised
brother
case
therefore
trying
jointly
violated
eighth
amendment
right
individualized
sentencing
error
harmless
kansas
found
especially
damning
subset
evidence
presented
might
admitted
separate
penalty
proceedings
kansas
attorney
general
requested
certiorari
alleging
best
serve
state
interest
federal
intervene
correct
kansas
complied
even
though
suggestion
kansas
violated
federal
constitutional
right
majority
reverses
kansas
points
ii
even
state
wrongly
decided
important
question
federal
law
sup
rule
often
decline
grant
certiorari
instead
reserving
grants
instances
benefits
hearing
case
outweigh
costs
colleagues
predecessors
effectively
set
forth
many
costs
granting
certiorari
cases
state
courts
grant
relief
criminal
defendants
risk
issuing
opinions
strictly
advisory
may
little
effect
lower
able
reinstate
holding
matter
state
law
florida
powell
stevens
dissenting
expend
resources
cases
concern
state
citizens
michigan
long
stevens
dissenting
intervene
intrastate
dispute
state
executive
judiciary
rather
entrusting
state
structure
government
sort
see
coleman
thompson
blackmun
dissenting
lose
valuable
data
best
methods
protecting
constitutional
rights
particular
concern
cases
like
federal
constitutional
question
turns
reasonable
likelihood
jury
confusion
empirical
question
best
answered
evidence
many
state
courts
cf
arizona
evans
ginsburg
dissenting
cases
demonstrate
yet
another
cost
granting
certiorari
correct
state
overprotection
federal
rights
explaining
federal
constitution
protect
particular
right
natural
buttress
conclusion
explaining
right
important
risks
discouraging
adopting
valuable
procedural
protections
even
matter
state
law
state
experimentation
best
guarantee
fair
trial
criminal
defendants
essential
aspect
federalism
scheme
see
linde
first
things
first
rediscovering
bill
rights
balt
rev
federal
constitution
guarantees
minimum
slate
protections
provide
individual
rights
constitutional
floor
see
brennan
bill
rights
revival
state
constitutions
guardians
constitutional
rights
rev
role
particularly
important
criminal
arena
state
courts
preside
many
millions
criminal
cases
federal
counterparts
likely
identify
protections
important
fair
trial
compare
statistics
project
examining
work
state
courts
analysis
state
caseloads
dept
justice
bureau
justice
statistics
federal
justice
statistics
pp
tables
majority
opinion
cases
illustrates
unnecessary
grant
certiorari
lead
unexpected
costs
disrupting
sort
state
experimentation
take
first
question
presented
cases
majority
actual
holding
eighth
amendment
require
instruction
specifying
mitigating
factors
need
proven
beyond
reasonable
doubt
ante
eighth
amendment
nothing
say
whether
instruction
wise
question
state
law
policy
majority
nonetheless
uses
considerable
influence
call
question
logic
specifying
burden
proof
mitigating
circumstances
majority
claims
assessing
aggravating
factor
purely
factual
determination
assessing
mitigation
involves
judgment
call
perhaps
value
call
thus
amenable
burdens
proof
ante
short
dividing
mitigating
factor
factual
component
judgmental
component
issuing
instructions
former
majority
wonders
whether
even
possible
apply
standard
proof
determination
ibid
observation
experience
needs
juries
majority
denigrates
many
specify
burden
proof
existence
mitigating
factors
matter
state
law
presumably
belief
fact
possible
brief
respondent
pp
even
recommend
instruction
specifying
mitigating
factors
need
proven
beyond
reasonable
doubt
see
idaho
jury
icji
jury
deliberations
jury
crim
majority
discussion
severance
likewise
short
circuits
state
experimentation
majority
content
hold
eighth
amendment
strictly
speaking
require
severance
capital
penalty
proceedings
instead
goes
explain
joint
capital
sentencing
proceedings
permissible
federal
constitution
fact
preferable
policy
matter
better
two
defendants
together
committed
crimes
placed
fates
determined
single
jury
ante
majority
even
intimates
severed
proceedings
may
worse
defendants
forbid
joinder
proceedings
perversely
increase
odds
freakis
imposition
death
sentences
ibid
quoting
gregg
georgia
joint
opinion
stewart
powell
stevens
much
ohio
georgia
mississippi
sentencing
regimes
routinely
allow
severance
phases
capital
proceedings
see
code
ann
upon
request
defendants
must
tried
separately
capital
cases
miss
code
ann
ohio
rev
code
ann
lexis
capital
defendants
shall
tried
separately
unless
good
cause
shown
joint
trial
evidence
three
adopted
severance
regime
based
misunderstanding
eighth
amendment
without
empirical
foundation
basis
experience
majority
asserts
regimes
may
increase
odds
arbitrariness
majority
claims
power
state
people
explain
federal
constitution
require
particular
result
ante
emphasis
deleted
able
pass
solely
federal
constitutional
ground
wisdom
state
holding
equivalent
question
though
pretends
sends
back
cases
like
one
clean
slate
rarely
fully
erases
thoughts
virtues
procedural
protection
issue
placing
thumb
scale
state
adopting
even
matter
state
law
procedural
protections
constitution
require
risks
turning
federal
constitution
ceiling
rather
floor
protection
individual
liberties
iii
see
reason
three
cases
kansas
warranted
intervention
given
costs
described
described
predecessors
colleagues
see
supra
federal
right
compromised
nobody
disputes
state
kansas
matter
state
law
reach
outcome
perhaps
importantly
questions
granted
certiorari
turn
specific
features
kansas
sentencing
scheme
result
kansas
opinion
unlikely
much
salience
kansas
wrong
wrong
opinion
subvert
federal
law
broader
scale
first
kansas
decision
jury
instruction
question
aimed
preserv
state
statute
favorable
distinction
protec
capital
defendant
eighth
amendment
right
individualized
sentencing
ensuring
jurors
precluded
considering
relevant
mitigating
evidence
emphasis
added
kansas
decision
thus
informed
combination
federal
state
considerations
decision
expressly
relies
state
unique
statutory
scheme
kansas
limited
potential
influencing
absurd
conclude
juror
unfamiliar
mechanics
law
might
confused
kansas
jury
instructions
almost
always
mention
aggravating
mitigating
instructions
breath
kansas
opinion
rested
largely
specific
language
ordering
state
instructions
jury
instructions
may
less
likely
effect
moreover
decision
made
unique
backdrop
trial
courts
failure
implement
kansas
earlier
demands
change
jury
instructions
capital
cases
case
kansas
considered
jury
instructions
insufficiently
confusing
reverse
judgment
sufficiently
confusing
demand
higher
clarity
going
forward
ny
instruction
dealing
consideration
mitigating
circumstances
state
need
proved
satisfaction
individual
juror
juror
sentencing
decision
beyond
reasonable
doubt
mitigating
circumstances
need
found
members
jury
order
considered
individual
juror
sentencing
decision
state
kleypas
kansas
pattern
instructions
revised
include
consideration
inexplicably
noted
gleason
consideration
kansas
reiterated
two
requirements
jury
instruction
see
state
scott
pattern
instructions
finally
changed
see
gleason
carr
brothers
tried
delay
kansas
initial
admonition
jury
instructions
finally
edited
kansas
opinion
gleason
may
rested
part
broader
eighth
amendment
principle
also
rested
lower
courts
failure
give
instructions
reflecting
kansas
repeated
recognition
required
content
given
context
kansas
decision
particularly
unlikely
undermine
federal
constitution
goes
severance
question
kansas
decision
depended
especially
damning
subset
aggravating
evidence
presented
may
admitted
severed
proceeding
kansas
capital
punishment
scheme
evidentiary
rules
evidence
one
brother
bad
influence
ibid
difference
joint
penalty
phase
severed
penalty
phase
may
limited
significance
evidence
may
admitted
joint
severed
proceedings
cf
brown
sanders
palmer
death
penalty
complete
guide
federal
state
laws
ed
thus
seems
unlikely
kansas
opinion
proven
instructive
even
though
couched
language
federal
constitution
iv
may
course
rare
cases
certiorari
warranted
state
prosecutor
alleges
state
highest
overprotected
criminal
defendant
circumstances
may
include
state
decision
favor
criminal
defendant
implicates
another
constitutional
right
see
nebraska
press
assn
stuart
state
indicates
hostility
applying
federal
precedents
florida
meyers
per
curiam
stevens
dissenting
state
grant
relief
particularly
likely
destabilize
significantly
interfere
federal
policy
none
circumstances
comparable
interest
present
cases
carr
brothers
committed
acts
almost
inconceivable
cruelty
depravity
majority
understandably
anxious
ensure
receive
deserts
anxious
fact
reaches
address
question
grant
certiorari
ante
believe
interest
justifies
correcting
kansas
error
also
calling
question
procedures
standard
adage
teaches
hard
cases
make
bad
law
see
northern
securities
holmes
dissenting
fear
cases
suggest
corollary
shocking
cases
make
much
law
believe
granted
certiorari
respectfully
dissent
footnotes
together
kansas
carr
kansas
gleason
also
certiorari
footnotes
facts
portion
opinion
come
kansas
parties
briefs
facts
portion
opinion
come
kansas
witness
testimony
see
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
relevant
instructions
carrs
sentencing
proceedings
materially
indistinguishable
see
app
pet
cert
pp
jonathan
also
alleges
prejudiced
jury
witnessing
brother
handcuffs
brother
requested
remain
visible
penalty
phase
commenced
allegation
mystifying
brother
handcuffs
visible
restraints
likely
caused
jury
see
jonathan
less
dangerous
two
footnotes
leave
aside
merits
majority
questionable
distinction
though
see
jury
conclusion
carr
brothers
committed
crime
especially
heinous
atrocious
cruel
manner
one
aggravating
circumstances
found
carr
brothers
jury
involved
less
judgment
value
call
mitigating
circumstances
alleged
see