smith
warden
spisak
argued
october
decided
january
ohio
courts
sentenced
respondent
spisak
death
denied
claims
direct
appeal
collateral
review
filed
federal
habeas
petition
claiming
trial
penalty
phase
instructions
verdict
forms
unconstitutionally
required
jury
consider
mitigation
factors
unanimously
found
mitigating
see
mills
maryland
counsel
inadequate
closing
argument
deprived
effective
assistance
counsel
see
strickland
washington
district
denied
petition
sixth
circuit
accepted
arguments
ordered
relief
held
state
upholding
mitigation
jury
instructions
forms
contrary
unreasonable
application
clearly
established
federal
law
determined
sixth
circuit
barred
reaching
contrary
decision
appeals
erred
holding
instructions
forms
contravened
mills
held
jury
instructions
verdict
forms
issue
violated
constitution
read
naturally
told
jury
find
particular
circumstance
mitigating
unless
jurors
agreed
mitigating
circumstance
proved
exist
even
assuming
mills
sets
forth
pertinent
clearly
established
federal
law
reviewing
decision
case
instructions
forms
used
differ
significantly
mills
made
clear
recommend
death
sentence
jury
find
unanimously
aggravating
factors
outweighed
mitigating
circumstances
say
jury
determine
existence
individual
mitigating
factor
unanimously
say
anything
even
whether
jury
make
individual
determinations
particular
mitigating
circumstance
existed
focused
overall
question
balancing
aggravating
mitigating
factors
repeatedly
told
jury
consider
relevant
evidence
thus
instructions
verdict
forms
clearly
bring
either
said
implied
constitutional
error
mills
instructions
pp
similarly
decision
rejecting
spisak
claim
contrary
unreasonable
application
law
clearly
established
strickland
prevail
claim
spisak
must
show
inter
alia
reasonable
probability
counsel
unprofessional
errors
result
proceeding
different
strickland
supra
even
assuming
closing
argument
inadequate
respects
claimed
spisak
finds
reasonable
probability
better
closing
argument
without
defects
made
significant
difference
different
adequate
closing
argument
taken
place
following
context
spisak
defense
trial
guilt
phase
consisted
effort
counsel
show
spisak
guilty
reason
insanity
counsel
apparently
hoping
demonstrate
spisak
mentally
defective
condition
called
stand
freely
admitted
committing
three
murders
two
shootings
repeatedly
expressed
intention
commit
murders
given
opportunity
light
background
following
reasons
assumed
closing
argument
deficiencies
raise
requisite
reasonable
probability
different
result
deficient
closing
first
since
sentencing
phase
took
place
immediately
guilt
phase
jurors
fresh
minds
government
extensive
graphic
evidence
regarding
killings
spisak
boastful
unrepentant
confessions
threats
commit
violent
acts
second
although
counsel
summarize
mitigating
evidence
great
detail
refer
defense
experts
detailed
testimony
regarding
spisak
mental
illness
also
fresh
jurors
minds
third
spisak
describe
mitigating
factors
counsel
might
mentioned
proposes
essentially
consist
aspects
mental
defect
factor
defense
experts
described
finally
light
counsel
several
appeals
jurors
sense
humanity
unlikely
explicit
elaborate
appeal
mercy
changed
result
either
alone
together
foregoing
circumstances
need
reach
spisak
claim
apply
claim
reach
conclusion
even
de
novo
review
pp
reversed
breyer
delivered
opinion
roberts
scalia
kennedy
thomas
ginsburg
alito
sotomayor
joined
stevens
joined
part
iii
stevens
filed
opinion
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
keith
smith
warden
petitioner
frank
spisak
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
january
justice
breyer
delivered
opinion
frank
spisak
respondent
convicted
ohio
trial
three
murders
two
attempted
murders
sentenced
death
filed
habeas
corpus
petition
federal
claiming
constitutional
errors
occurred
trial
first
spisak
claimed
jury
instructions
penalty
phase
unconstitutionally
required
jury
consider
mitigation
factors
jury
unanimously
found
mitigating
see
mills
maryland
second
spisak
claimed
suffered
significant
harm
result
counsel
inadequate
closing
argument
penalty
phase
proceeding
see
strickland
washington
federal
appeals
accepted
arguments
ordered
habeas
relief
reverse
appeals
ohio
jury
convicted
spisak
three
murders
two
attempted
murders
cleveland
state
university
jury
recommended
judge
imposed
death
sentence
ohio
courts
denied
spisak
claims
direct
appeal
collateral
review
state
spisak
ohio
per
curiam
state
spisak
wl
ohio
cuyahoga
apr
state
spisak
ohio
per
curiam
spisak
sought
federal
writ
habeas
corpus
among
claims
argued
sentencing
phase
trial
violated
constitution
two
reasons
consider
district
denied
petition
spisak
coyle
case
nd
ohio
apr
app
pet
cert
appeals
accepted
spisak
two
claims
namely
mitigation
instruction
claim
claim
spisak
mitchell
appeals
consequently
ordered
district
issue
conditional
writ
habeas
corpus
forbidding
spisak
execution
state
ohio
sought
certiorari
granted
petition
vacated
appeals
judgment
hudson
spisak
remanded
case
consideration
light
two
recent
cases
held
lower
federal
courts
properly
taken
account
deference
federal
law
grants
determinations
federal
habeas
review
ibid
see
carey
musladin
schriro
landrigan
remand
sixth
circuit
reinstated
earlier
opinion
spisak
hudson
state
sought
certiorari
granted
petition
reverse
ii
spisak
first
claim
concerns
instructions
verdict
forms
jury
received
sentencing
phase
trial
appeals
held
sentencing
instructions
unconstitutional
view
instructions
taken
together
forms
require
juror
unanimity
presence
mitigating
factor
contrary
holding
mills
maryland
supra
since
parties
dispute
ohio
courts
adjudicated
claim
considered
rejected
merits
law
permits
federal
reach
contrary
decision
decision
contrary
involved
unreasonable
application
clearly
established
federal
law
determined
unlike
appeals
conclude
spisak
claim
satisfy
standard
parties
like
appeals
assume
mills
sets
forth
pertinent
clearly
established
federal
law
recognizing
uncertainty
whether
mills
clearly
established
federal
law
purpose
reviewing
ohio
opinion
shall
assume
compare
williams
taylor
stevens
applicable
date
purposes
determining
whether
federal
law
established
conviction
became
final
applicable
date
time
relevant
decision
see
state
spisak
ohio
decided
apr
cert
denied
decided
mar
mills
maryland
supra
decided
june
rule
set
forth
mills
based
two
principles
first
constitution
forbids
imposition
death
penalty
sentencing
judge
jury
precluded
considering
mitigating
factor
aspect
defendant
character
record
circumstances
offense
defendant
proffers
basis
sentence
less
death
quoting
eddings
oklahoma
turn
quoting
lockett
ohio
plurality
opinion
second
sentencing
judge
jury
may
refuse
consider
precluded
considering
relevant
mitigating
evidence
mills
quoting
skipper
south
carolina
turn
quoting
eddings
supra
applying
principles
held
jury
instructions
verdict
forms
issue
case
violated
constitution
read
naturally
told
jury
find
particular
circumstance
mitigating
unless
jurors
agreed
mitigating
circumstance
proved
exist
mills
example
defense
presents
evidence
three
potentially
mitigating
considerations
jurors
may
believe
first
mitigating
second
third
even
one
jurors
believes
one
three
mitigating
considerations
exists
barred
considering
jurors
disagree
held
constitution
forbids
imposition
death
penalty
see
see
also
mckoy
north
carolina
mills
requires
juror
permitted
consider
give
effect
mitigating
evidence
deciding
whether
aggravating
circumstances
outweigh
mitigating
circumstances
instructions
mills
led
reasonable
juror
believe
contrary
held
sentencing
proceeding
violated
constitution
evaluating
appeals
determination
examined
jury
instructions
verdict
forms
issue
mills
compared
used
present
case
mills
sentencing
phase
trial
judge
instructed
jury
fill
verdict
form
three
distinct
parts
section
set
forth
list
specific
aggravating
circumstances
next
spaces
jury
mark
yes
list
form
said
based
upon
evidence
unanimously
find
following
aggravating
circumstances
marked
proven
aggravating
circumstance
marked
proven
emphasis
added
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
section
ii
set
forth
list
eight
potentially
mitigating
circumstances
seven
specific
circumstances
eighth
designated
next
spaces
jury
mark
yes
list
form
said
based
upon
evidence
unanimously
find
following
mitigating
circumstances
marked
proven
exist
mitigating
circumstance
marked
proven
emphasis
added
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
section
iii
set
forth
overall
balancing
question
along
spaces
jury
mark
yes
said
based
evidence
unanimously
find
proven
mitigating
circumstances
marked
section
ii
outweigh
aggravating
circumstances
marked
section
emphasis
added
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
explaining
forms
judge
instructed
jury
example
told
jury
mark
jury
form
concluded
aggravating
circumstance
proved
otherwise
said
course
must
answer
ibid
emphasis
deleted
instructions
together
forms
told
jury
mark
yes
section
ii
list
mitigating
factors
jury
unanimously
concluded
particular
mitigating
factor
proved
consider
weighing
analysis
section
iii
mitigating
factors
marked
yes
section
ii
thus
found
jury
instructed
consider
ultimate
weighing
aggravating
mitigating
evidence
mitigating
factors
jury
unanimously
found
exist
see
instructions
jury
forms
case
differ
significantly
mills
trial
judge
instructed
jury
aggravating
factors
consider
specifications
jury
found
proved
beyond
reasonable
doubt
guilt
phase
trial
essentially
murder
committed
course
conduct
including
crimes
two
murders
murder
committed
intent
evade
apprehension
punishment
another
offense
tr
july
explained
concept
mitigating
factor
listed
examples
including
defendant
mental
disease
defect
lacked
substantial
capacity
appreciate
criminality
conduct
conform
conduct
requirements
law
also
told
jury
take
account
mitigating
consideration
found
relevant
issue
whether
defendant
sentenced
death
instructed
jury
state
bore
burden
proving
beyond
reasonable
doubt
aggravating
circumstances
outweighed
mitigating
factors
respect
procedure
jury
reach
verdict
judge
told
jury
following
ou
trial
jury
must
consider
relevant
evidence
raised
trial
evidence
testimony
received
hearing
arguments
counsel
must
determine
whether
beyond
reasonable
doubt
aggravating
circumstances
spisak
found
guilty
committing
separate
counts
sufficient
outweigh
mitigating
factors
present
case
twelve
members
jury
find
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
aggravating
circumstance
separate
count
outweighs
mitigating
factors
must
return
finding
hand
considering
relevant
evidence
raised
trial
evidence
testimony
received
hearing
arguments
counsel
find
state
failed
prove
beyond
reasonable
doubt
aggravating
circumstances
spisak
found
guilty
committing
separate
counts
outweigh
mitigating
factors
proceed
determine
two
possible
life
imprisonment
sentences
recommend
judge
gave
jury
two
verdict
forms
aggravating
factor
first
two
forms
said
jury
case
find
beyond
reasonable
doubt
aggravating
circumstance
sufficient
outweigh
mitigating
factors
present
jury
recommend
sentence
death
imposed
verdict
form
read
jury
find
aggravating
circumstances
sufficient
outweigh
mitigation
factors
present
jury
recommend
defendant
sentenced
life
imprisonment
instructions
forms
made
clear
recommend
death
sentence
jury
find
unanimously
beyond
reasonable
doubt
aggravating
factors
outweighed
mitigating
circumstances
instructions
say
jury
must
determine
existence
individual
mitigating
factor
unanimously
neither
instructions
forms
said
anything
even
whether
jury
make
individual
determinations
particular
mitigating
circumstance
existed
focused
overall
balancing
question
instructions
repeatedly
told
jury
conside
relevant
evidence
view
instructions
verdict
forms
clearly
bring
either
said
implied
circumstance
mills
found
critical
namely
substantial
possibility
reasonable
jurors
upon
receiving
judge
instructions
case
attempting
complete
verdict
form
instructed
well
may
thought
precluded
considering
mitigating
evidence
unless
jurors
agreed
existence
particular
circumstance
consequently
conclude
state
decision
upholding
forms
instructions
contrary
unreasonable
application
clearly
established
federal
law
determined
mills
add
appeals
found
jury
instructions
unconstitutional
additional
reason
instructions
require
jury
unanimously
reject
death
sentence
considering
sentencing
alternatives
citing
maples
coyle
however
previously
held
jury
instructions
unconstitutional
reason
mills
says
nothing
matter
neither
parties
courts
referred
beck
alabama
identified
precedent
setting
forth
rule
cf
jones
rejecting
arguably
analogous
claim
see
post
stevens
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
whatever
legal
merits
rule
underlying
verdict
forms
case
consider
direct
appeal
jury
instructions
spisak
trial
contrary
clearly
established
federal
law
iii
spisak
second
claim
counsel
closing
argument
sentencing
phase
trial
inadequate
violate
sixth
amendment
prevail
spisak
must
show
counsel
representation
fell
objective
standard
reasonableness
strickland
reasonable
probability
counsel
unprofessional
errors
result
proceeding
different
ohio
held
spisak
claim
basis
review
record
state
spisak
ohio
citing
inter
alia
strickland
supra
district
concluded
counsel
constitutionally
adequate
job
simply
reasonable
probability
absent
counsel
alleged
errors
jury
concluded
balance
aggravating
mitigating
circumstances
warrant
death
spisak
coyle
app
pet
cert
appeals
however
reached
contrary
conclusion
held
counsel
closing
argument
measured
objective
standard
reasonableness
inadequate
asserted
reasonable
probability
exists
adequate
representation
led
different
result
quoting
strickland
supra
responding
state
petition
certiorari
agreed
review
appeals
terse
finding
reasonable
probability
adequate
argument
changed
juror
vote
closing
argument
penalty
phase
spisak
counsel
described
spisak
killings
detail
acknowledged
spisak
admiration
hitler
inspired
crimes
portrayed
spisak
sick
twisted
demented
tr
july
said
spisak
never
going
different
ibid
pointed
experts
testified
spisak
suffered
degree
mental
illness
fairly
lengthy
rambling
disquisition
decisions
calling
expert
witnesses
preparing
counsel
argued
even
spisak
legally
insane
warrant
verdict
guilty
reason
insanity
nonetheless
sufficiently
mentally
ill
lessen
culpability
point
executed
counsel
also
told
jury
weighing
spisak
mental
illness
substantial
aggravating
factors
present
case
jurors
draw
sense
pride
living
humane
society
made
humane
people
humanity
said
required
jury
weigh
evidence
fairly
loyal
oath
jurors
taken
uphold
law
spisak
supporting
amici
say
argument
constitutionally
inadequate
overly
emphasized
gruesome
nature
killings
overly
emphasized
spisak
threats
continue
crimes
understated
facts
upon
experts
based
mental
illness
conclusions
said
little
nothing
possible
mitigating
circumstance
made
explicit
request
jury
return
verdict
death
assume
present
purposes
spisak
correct
closing
argument
inadequate
nevertheless
find
reasonable
probability
better
closing
argument
without
defects
made
significant
difference
different
adequate
closing
argument
taken
place
following
context
spisak
admitted
committed
three
murders
two
shootings
spisak
defense
guilt
phase
trial
consisted
effort
counsel
show
spisak
guilty
reason
insanity
counsel
apparently
hoping
demonstrate
spisak
mentally
defective
condition
called
stand
spisak
testified
shot
killed
horace
rickerson
timothy
sheehan
brian
warford
also
admitted
shot
tried
kill
john
hardaway
shot
coletta
dartt
committed
crimes
said
follower
adolf
hitler
spisak
spiritual
leader
war
survival
aryan
people
july
said
purchased
guns
stockpiled
ammunition
war
hoped
create
terror
cleveland
state
university
one
prime
targets
jews
system
brainwashing
youth
spisak
said
february
shot
rickerson
black
rickerson
made
sexual
advance
spisak
university
bathroom
expressed
satisfaction
eliminated
particular
threat
white
race
july
june
saw
stranger
john
hardaway
train
platform
shot
seven
times
looking
black
person
kill
blood
atonement
recent
crime
two
white
women
july
added
felt
good
shooting
hardaway
accomplished
something
later
felt
ind
bad
learned
hardaway
survived
august
spisak
shot
coletta
dartt
said
heard
making
derisive
remarks
us
meaning
nazi
party
later
august
shot
killed
timothy
sheehan
thought
one
jewish
professors
liked
hang
around
men
room
seduce
pervert
subvert
young
people
go
july
spisak
added
sorry
murder
later
learned
sheehan
jewish
like
thought
ibid
three
days
later
search
destroy
mission
shot
killed
brian
warford
young
black
man
looked
like
almost
asleep
bus
shelter
fulfill
duty
inflict
maximum
amount
casualties
enemies
spisak
also
testified
continue
commit
similar
crimes
chance
said
warford
murder
want
get
caught
time
wanted
able
july
letter
written
friend
called
murders
rickerson
warford
finest
thing
ever
whole
life
expressed
wish
human
submachine
gun
right
exterminate
black
men
watch
scream
twitch
agony
testified
still
guns
escape
jail
go
continue
war
started
continue
inflict
maximum
amount
damage
enemies
able
state
replied
attempting
show
spisak
lying
testimony
motives
crimes
state
contended
instead
shootings
motivated
less
unusual
purposes
robbery
see
defense
effort
show
spisak
guilty
reason
insanity
foundered
trial
judge
refused
instruct
jury
consider
question
excluded
expert
testimony
regarding
spisak
mental
state
defense
expert
witness
oscar
markey
written
report
diagnosing
spisak
suffering
schizotypal
personality
disorder
atypical
psychotic
disorder
times
unable
control
impulses
assault
july
testimony
somewhat
ambiguous
voir
dire
however
conceded
say
spisak
failed
ohio
sanity
standard
time
murders
markey
made
concession
jury
granted
prosecution
renewed
motion
exclude
markey
testimony
instructed
jury
disregard
testimony
heard
excluded
defense
proffered
reports
psychologists
psychiatrists
examined
spisak
none
reports
said
spisak
met
ohio
insanity
standard
time
crimes
july
sentencing
phase
proceedings
defense
counsel
called
three
expert
witnesses
testified
spisak
suffered
degree
mental
illness
sandra
mcpherson
clinical
psychologist
said
spisak
suffered
schizotypal
borderline
personality
disorders
characterized
bizarre
paranoid
thinking
gender
identification
conflict
emotional
instability
added
defects
substantially
impair
ability
conform
law
requirements
july
kurt
bertschinger
psychiatrist
testified
spisak
suffered
schizotypal
personality
disorder
mental
illness
impair
reason
extent
substantial
inability
know
wrongfulness
substantial
inability
refrain
markey
whose
testimony
stricken
guilt
phase
testified
agreed
experts
diagnoses
july
light
background
following
reasons
find
assumed
deficiencies
defense
counsel
closing
argument
raise
reasonable
probability
deficient
closing
result
proceeding
different
strickland
therefore
find
ohio
decision
rejecting
spisak
claim
unreasonable
application
law
clearly
established
strickland
first
since
sentencing
phase
took
place
immediately
following
conclusion
guilt
phase
jurors
fresh
minds
government
evidence
regarding
killings
included
photographs
dead
bodies
images
formed
basis
defense
counsel
vivid
descriptions
crimes
well
spisak
boastful
unrepentant
confessions
threats
commit
acts
violence
therefore
see
less
descriptive
closing
argument
fewer
disparaging
comments
spisak
made
significant
difference
similarly
fresh
jurors
minds
three
defense
experts
testimony
spisak
suffered
mental
illness
jury
heard
experts
explain
specific
facts
upon
based
conclusions
well
learned
family
background
struggles
gender
identity
jury
heard
experts
draw
connections
mental
illness
crimes
see
made
significant
difference
counsel
gone
beyond
actual
argument
emphasized
mental
illness
mitigating
factor
referred
jury
experts
testimony
repeating
facts
connections
experts
described
spisak
tell
us
mitigating
factors
counsel
might
mentioned
proposes
essentially
consist
aspects
mental
defect
factor
defense
experts
described
finally
light
counsel
several
appeals
jurors
sense
humanity
used
words
humane
people
humane
society
times
various
points
argument
find
explicit
elaborate
appeal
mercy
changed
result
either
alone
together
circumstances
discussed
thus
conclude
reasonable
probability
adequate
closing
argument
changed
result
ohio
rejection
spisak
claim
contrary
unreasonable
application
strickland
spisak
contends
deferential
standard
review
apply
claim
ohio
may
reached
question
whether
counsel
closing
argument
caused
spisak
prejudice
ohio
summary
rejection
claim
indicate
whether
rested
conclusion
upon
finding
counsel
ineffective
better
argument
made
difference
see
state
spisak
ohio
spisak
argues
circumstances
federal
defer
state
may
decided
question
instead
decide
matter
afresh
lower
federal
courts
rejected
arguments
similar
spisak
see
hennon
cooper
see
also
weeks
angelone
applying
standard
case
involving
state
summary
denial
claim
though
strickland
claim
without
full
briefing
regarding
whether
applied
summary
decision
chadwick
janecka
alito
relying
weeks
holding
applies
state
denies
claim
merits
without
giving
indication
reached
decision
see
generally
hertz
liebman
federal
habeas
corpus
practice
procedure
pp
ed
however
need
decide
whether
deference
required
without
deference
conclusion
reasons
judgment
appeals
sixth
circuit
reversed
ordered
keith
smith
warden
petitioner
frank
spisak
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
january
justice
stevens
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
judgment
appeals
correctly
concluded
two
errors
occurred
spisak
trial
violated
clearly
established
federal
law
first
jury
instructions
impermissibly
required
jury
unanimously
reject
death
sentence
considering
sentencing
options
second
closing
argument
spisak
counsel
egregious
constitutionally
deficient
standard
nevertheless
reasons
set
forth
part
iii
opinion
ante
agree
errors
prejudice
spisak
thus
entitled
relief
jury
instructions
given
spisak
penalty
phase
described
opinion
ante
fairly
read
require
jury
first
consider
whether
death
penalty
warranted
whether
aggravating
factors
outweigh
mitigating
factors
moving
consider
whether
instead
lesser
penalty
one
two
available
life
sentences
appropriate
consistent
ohio
law
time
spisak
jury
told
must
reach
decision
unanimously
jury
instructed
consequence
failure
agree
unanimously
spisak
sentenced
death
spisak
appeals
described
instructions
acquittal
first
led
reasonable
jury
believe
first
acquit
defendant
death
unanimously
give
effect
lesser
penalty
following
prior
decision
davis
mitchell
struck
virtually
identical
jury
instructions
spisak
mitchell
appeals
concluded
instructions
given
spisak
penalty
phase
impermissible
require
jury
unanimously
reject
death
sentence
considering
sentencing
alternatives
davis
explained
instruction
requires
capital
jury
first
unanimously
reject
death
penalty
consider
life
sentence
precludes
individual
jury
giving
effect
mitigating
evidence
source
constitutional
infirmity
decided
decision
mills
maryland
reasons
cogently
examined
justice
breyer
opinion
ante
agree
mills
clearly
establish
instructions
issue
unconstitutional
view
decision
beck
alabama
beck
held
death
penalty
may
imposed
jury
permitted
consider
verdict
guilt
lesser
included
offense
evidence
supported
verdict
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
time
alabama
death
penalty
statute
consistently
construed
preclude
lesser
included
offense
instructions
capital
cases
thus
alabama
jury
given
choice
either
convicting
defendant
capital
crime
case
required
impose
death
penalty
acquitting
thus
allowing
escape
penalties
alleged
participation
crime
unique
features
alabama
capital
punishment
beck
jury
believed
either
convict
beck
thus
sending
death
acquit
thus
setting
free
jury
presented
third
option
convicting
noncapital
offense
thus
ensuring
receive
substantial
punishment
receive
death
penalty
concluded
false
choice
jury
death
acquit
introduce
level
uncertainty
unreliability
factfinding
process
tolerated
capital
case
words
difficulty
alabama
statute
interjects
irrelevant
considerations
factfinding
process
diverting
jury
attention
central
issue
whether
state
satisfied
burden
proving
beyond
reasonable
doubt
defendant
guilty
capital
crime
thus
one
hand
unavailability
third
option
convicting
lesser
included
offense
may
encourage
jury
convict
impermissible
reason
belief
defendant
guilty
serious
crime
punished
hand
apparently
mandatory
nature
death
penalty
may
encourage
acquit
equally
impermissible
reason
whatever
crime
defendant
deserve
death
although
beck
dealt
instructions
reach
holding
limited
third
option
discussed
beck
plainly
life
sentence
moreover
unusual
features
alabama
capital
sentencing
scheme
collapsed
guilt
penalty
phases
jury
judge
concern
beck
presenting
jury
two
options
death
punishment
introduced
risk
arbitrariness
error
deliberative
process
constitution
abide
capital
context
see
spaziano
florida
goal
beck
rule
words
eliminate
distortion
factfinding
process
created
jury
forced
choice
capital
murder
innocence
held
therefore
jury
must
given
meaningful
opportunity
consider
embrace
equivalent
evidence
supports
option
jury
instructions
used
spisak
penalty
phase
interposed
jury
false
choice
holding
beck
prohibits
requiring
spisak
jury
decide
first
whether
state
met
burden
respect
death
sentence
reach
decision
unanimously
instructions
deprived
jury
meaningful
opportunity
consider
third
option
namely
life
sentence
indeed
instructions
every
bit
pernicious
issue
beck
led
individual
jurors
falsely
believe
failure
agree
might
resulted
new
trial
event
give
effect
determination
life
sentence
appropriate
unless
first
convinced
peers
jury
reject
death
sentence
admittedly
spisak
never
identified
beck
source
constitutional
infirmity
issue
case
courts
cite
rely
upon
spisak
consistently
pressed
argument
terms
wholly
consistent
beck
direct
appeal
contended
example
severely
prejudiced
erroneous
jury
forms
jurors
never
informed
happen
unable
reach
unanimous
decision
may
led
irreparable
speculation
failed
agree
frank
spisak
freed
new
trial
sentencing
hearing
improper
speculation
may
led
agreement
death
go
along
majority
jury
instructed
unable
unanimously
agree
death
must
return
verdict
one
life
sentences
alternative
impose
life
sentence
exh
record
brief
ohio
untenable
choice
spisak
describes
perfectly
analogous
quandary
discussed
described
beck
see
also
extremely
doubtful
juries
understand
full
implications
mistrial
confidence
choice
mistrial
option
ultimately
lead
right
result
thus
assurance
second
trial
end
conviction
defendant
lesser
included
offense
omitted
spisak
appeals
correctly
assailed
jury
instructions
issue
case
view
beck
provides
proper
basis
clearly
established
federal
law
conclude
instructions
unconstitutional
ii
petitioner
defends
spisak
counsel
closing
argument
reasonable
strategic
decision
draw
sting
prosecution
argument
gain
credibility
jury
conceding
weaknesses
case
brief
petitioner
agree
strategy
generally
reasonable
one
indeed
reasonable
strategy
difficult
circumstances
case
even
spisak
concedes
counsel
faced
admittedly
difficult
case
closing
argument
penalty
phase
brief
respondent
surely
strategy
executed
poorly
render
even
reasonable
trial
tactics
constitutionally
deficient
strickland
washington
case
difficult
convey
thoroughly
egregious
counsel
closing
argument
without
reproducing
entirety
assessment
closing
lengthy
rambling
brief
description
content
see
ante
accurately
capture
catastrophe
counsel
failed
strategy
suffice
say
argument
shares
far
common
prosecutor
closing
criminal
defense
attorney
indeed
argument
outrageous
rightly
subjected
prosecutor
charges
misconduct
see
brief
steven
lubet
et
al
amici
curiae
observing
counsel
closing
argument
improper
even
coming
prosecutor
examples
order
presumably
take
sting
prosecution
case
brief
petitioner
counsel
described
client
acts
vivid
detail
jury
ou
smell
almost
blood
smell
urine
bathroom
death
smell
death
feel
loneliness
railroad
platform
know
terror
victim
felt
turned
looked
thick
glasses
looked
muzzle
gun
kept
spitting
bullets
see
relatively
young
man
cut
many
years
live
remember
widow
certainly
remember
looking
children
many
family
albums
many
family
portraits
dated
many
empty
spaces
much
terror
left
hearts
call
lucky
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
presumably
gain
credibility
jury
brief
petitioner
counsel
argued
client
deserved
sympathy
actions
sympathy
course
part
consideration
even
certainly
look
sympathy
demands
none
ladies
gentlemen
turn
look
frank
spisak
look
good
deeds
done
none
look
good
thoughts
none
sick
twisted
demented
never
going
different
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
strategy
really
broke
point
counsel
endeavor
direct
negative
statements
client
toward
express
appeal
contrary
counsel
concluded
telling
jury
whatever
going
proud
ibid
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
take
mean
counsel
view
either
outcome
death
life
valid
conclusion
ibid
spisak
crimes
seemingly
unmitigated
hatred
motivating
commission
truly
awful
excuse
lawyer
duty
represent
client
within
bounds
prevailing
professional
norms
mere
fact
counsel
laudably
may
strategy
build
rapport
jury
lessen
impact
prosecution
case
excuse
counsel
utter
failure
achieve
either
objectives
closing
argument
short
counsel
argument
grossly
transgressed
bounds
constitutionally
competent
counsel
done
similar
situation
iii
notwithstanding
two
serious
constitutional
errors
agree
errors
entitle
spisak
relief
justice
breyer
discussion
part
iii
makes
vividly
clear
see
ante
spisak
conduct
alienated
ostracized
jury
crimes
monstrous
judgment
even
skillful
closing
arguments
even
one
befitting
clarence
darrow
created
reasonable
probability
different
outcome
case
similarly
light
spisak
conduct
jury
gravity
aggravating
circumstances
offense
instructional
error
also
harmless
substantial
injurious
effect
record
brecht
abrahamson
accordingly
concur
judgment
concur
discussion
prejudice
part
iii
opinion
footnotes
ohio
longer
uses
type
jury
instructions
issue
case
ohio
instructed
ohio
solitary
juror
may
prevent
death
penalty
recommendation
finding
aggravating
circumstances
case
outweigh
mitigating
factors
jurors
point
forward
instructed
state
brooks
ohio
although
brooks
decision
signaled
change
ohio
capital
jury
instructions
change
state
law
one
juror
power
prevent
death
penalty
recommendation
brooks
see
state
springer
ohio
holding
offender
must
sentenced
life
jury
deadlocks
thus
consistent
view
accurate
sentencing
information
indispensable
prerequisite
jury
determination
whether
defendant
shall
live
die
gregg
georgia
joint
opinion
stewart
powell
stevens
jj
ohio
high
laudably
improved
upon
accuracy
ohio
capital
jury
instructions
brooks
notably
beck
substantially
predates
spisak
trial
thus
application
beck
obviates
discussion
federal
law
established
antiterrorism
effective
death
penalty
act
purposes
see
ante
regardless
accordance
view
expressed
williams
taylor
opinion
stevens
conclude
decision
mills
decided
spisak
conviction
became
final
also
available
alabama
law
judge
conducts
separate
proceeding
jury
returned
conviction
capital
offense
beck
thus
jury
reasonably
believed
verdict
set
defendant
punishment
death
make
matters
worse
graphic
emotionally
charged
descriptions
spisak
crimes
irrelevant
state
law
even
purposes
state
case
aggravating
circumstances
see
state
wogenstahl
ohio
nature
circumstances
offense
may
enter
statutory
weighing
process
side
mitigation
see
also
state
johnson
ohio
explaining
statutory
aggravating
circumstances
narrowly
construed
ohio
rev
code
ann
identifying
aggravating
circumstances
including
heinous
circumstances
offense
counsel
attempt
appeal
jury
sense
humanity
perhaps
implicitly
suggesting
humane
people
condemn
others
especially
mental
illness
death
app
pet
cert
counsel
never
requested
life
sentence
behalf
client