eddings
oklahoma
argued
november
decided
january
petitioner
convicted
oklahoma
trial
murder
killing
police
officer
sentenced
death
time
offense
petitioner
years
old
tried
adult
oklahoma
death
penalty
statute
provides
sentencing
proceeding
evidence
may
presented
mitigating
circumstances
certain
enumerated
aggravating
circumstances
sentencing
hearing
state
alleged
certain
enumerated
aggravating
circumstances
petitioner
mitigation
presented
substantial
evidence
turbulent
family
history
beatings
harsh
father
serious
emotional
disturbance
imposing
death
sentence
trial
judge
found
state
proved
alleged
aggravating
circumstances
refused
matter
law
consider
mitigation
circumstances
petitioner
unhappy
upbringing
emotional
disturbance
found
mitigating
circumstance
petitioner
youth
circumstance
held
insufficient
outweigh
aggravating
circumstances
oklahoma
criminal
appeals
affirmed
held
death
sentence
must
vacated
imposed
without
type
individualized
consideration
mitigating
factors
required
eighth
fourteenth
amendments
capital
cases
lockett
ohio
pp
eighth
fourteenth
amendments
require
sentencer
precluded
considering
mitigating
factor
aspect
defendant
character
record
circumstances
offense
defendant
proffers
basis
sentence
less
death
lockett
ohio
supra
rule
follows
requirement
capital
punishment
imposed
fairly
reasonable
consistency
recognizes
consistency
produced
ignoring
individual
differences
false
consistency
pp
limitation
placed
courts
upon
mitigating
evidence
consider
violated
rule
state
may
statute
preclude
sentencer
considering
mitigating
factor
neither
may
sentencer
refuse
consider
matter
law
relevant
mitigating
evidence
sentencer
reviewing
may
determine
weight
given
relevant
mitigating
evidence
may
give
weight
excluding
consideration
evidence
difficult
family
history
emotional
disturbance
petitioner
offered
sentencing
hearing
duly
considered
sentencing
pp
powell
delivered
opinion
brennan
marshall
stevens
joined
brennan
post
post
filed
concurring
opinions
burger
filed
dissenting
opinion
white
blackmun
rehnquist
joined
post
jay
baker
appointment
argued
cause
filed
brief
petitioner
david
lee
assistant
attorney
general
oklahoma
argued
cause
respondent
brief
jan
eric
cartwright
attorney
general
tomilou
gentry
liddell
assistant
attorney
general
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
filed
gail
robinson
kevin
michael
mcnally
vincent
aprile
ii
kentucky
youth
advocates
et
al
robert
walker
national
council
crime
delinquency
et
al
daniel
popeo
paul
kamenar
filed
brief
washington
legal
foundation
amicus
curiae
justice
powell
delivered
opinion
petitioner
monty
lee
eddings
convicted
murder
sentenced
death
sentence
imposed
without
type
individualized
consideration
mitigating
factors
required
eighth
fourteenth
amendments
capital
cases
lockett
ohio
opinion
burger
reverse
april
eddings
youth
several
younger
companions
ran
away
missouri
homes
traveled
car
owned
eddings
brother
drove
without
destination
purpose
southwesterly
direction
eventually
reaching
oklahoma
turnpike
eddings
car
shotgun
several
rifles
taken
father
momentarily
lost
control
car
signalled
pull
officer
crabtree
oklahoma
highway
patrol
eddings
officer
approached
car
eddings
stuck
loaded
shotgun
window
fired
killing
officer
eddings
juvenile
state
moved
certified
stand
trial
adult
finding
prosecutive
merit
complaint
eddings
amenable
rehabilitation
within
juvenile
system
trial
granted
motion
ruling
affirmed
appeal
crim
app
cert
denied
sub
nom
eddings
oklahoma
eddings
charged
murder
first
degree
district
creek
county
found
guilty
upon
plea
nolo
contendere
oklahoma
death
penalty
statute
provides
pertinent
part
upon
conviction
guilt
defendant
murder
first
degree
shall
conduct
separate
sentencing
proceeding
determine
whether
defendant
sentenced
death
life
imprisonment
sentencing
proceeding
evidence
may
presented
mitigating
circumstances
aggravating
circumstances
enumerated
act
okla
tit
emphasis
added
sentencing
hearing
state
alleged
three
aggravating
circumstances
enumerated
statute
murder
especially
heinous
atrocious
cruel
crime
committed
purpose
avoiding
preventing
lawful
arrest
probability
defendant
commit
criminal
acts
violence
constitute
continuing
threat
society
mitigation
eddings
presented
substantial
evidence
hearing
troubled
youth
testimony
supervising
juvenile
officer
indicated
eddings
raised
without
proper
guidance
parents
divorced
years
old
eddings
lived
mother
without
rules
supervision
app
suggestion
eddings
mother
alcoholic
possibly
prostitute
time
eddings
longer
controlled
mother
sent
live
father
neither
father
control
boy
attempts
reason
talk
gave
way
physical
punishment
juvenile
officer
testified
eddings
frightened
bitter
father
overreacted
used
excessive
physical
punishment
eddings
found
thing
thought
effectful
boy
actual
punishment
physical
violence
hitting
strap
something
like
testimony
witnesses
indicated
eddings
emotionally
disturbed
general
time
crime
mental
emotional
development
level
several
years
age
state
psychologist
stated
eddings
sociopathic
antisocial
personality
approximately
youths
suffering
disorder
grew
aged
sociologist
specializing
juvenile
offenders
testified
eddings
treatable
psychiatrist
testified
eddings
rehabilitated
intensive
therapy
period
testified
eddings
pull
trigger
kill
someone
even
think
knew
psychiatrist
suggested
treated
eddings
longer
pose
serious
threat
society
conclusion
evidence
trial
judge
weighed
evidence
aggravating
mitigating
circumstances
found
state
proved
three
alleged
aggravating
circumstances
beyond
reasonable
doubt
turning
evidence
mitigating
circumstances
judge
found
eddings
youth
mitigating
factor
great
weight
given
serious
consideration
youth
defendant
particular
crime
committed
fail
think
carrying
duty
consider
mitigation
circumstances
eddings
unhappy
upbringing
emotional
disturbance
persuaded
entirely
fact
youth
sixteen
years
old
heinous
crime
committed
following
law
opinion
consider
fact
young
man
violent
background
emphasis
added
finding
mitigating
circumstance
eddings
youth
finding
circumstance
outweigh
aggravating
circumstances
present
judge
sentenced
eddings
death
criminal
appeals
affirmed
sentence
death
found
aggravating
circumstances
alleged
state
present
recited
mitigating
evidence
presented
eddings
detail
end
agreed
trial
fact
eddings
youth
properly
considered
mitigating
circumstance
eddings
also
argues
mental
state
time
murder
stresses
family
history
saying
suffering
severe
psychological
emotional
disorders
killing
actuality
inevitable
product
way
raised
doubt
petitioner
personality
disorder
evidence
tends
show
knew
difference
right
wrong
time
pulled
trigger
test
criminal
responsibility
state
reason
petitioner
family
history
useful
explaining
behaved
way
excuse
behaviour
citation
omitted
ii
lockett
ohio
chief
justice
burger
writing
plurality
stated
rule
apply
today
conclude
eighth
fourteenth
amendments
require
sentencer
precluded
considering
mitigating
factor
aspect
defendant
character
record
circumstances
offense
defendant
proffers
basis
sentence
less
death
emphasis
original
chief
justice
explained
rule
lockett
product
considerable
history
reflecting
law
effort
develop
system
capital
punishment
consistent
principled
also
humane
sensible
uniqueness
individual
since
early
days
common
law
legal
system
struggled
accommodate
twin
objectives
thus
common
law
began
treating
criminal
homicides
capital
offenses
mandatory
sentence
death
later
allowed
exceptions
first
exclusion
entitled
claim
benefit
clergy
limiting
capital
punishment
murders
upon
malice
prepensed
country
attempted
soften
rigor
system
mandatory
death
sentences
inherited
england
first
grading
murder
different
degrees
murder
first
degree
capital
offense
committing
use
death
penalty
absolute
discretion
jury
time
decision
furman
georgia
country
moved
far
mandatory
system
imposition
capital
punishment
frequently
become
arbitrary
capricious
beginning
furman
attempted
provide
standards
constitutional
death
penalty
serve
goals
measured
consistent
application
fairness
accused
thus
gregg
georgia
principal
opinion
held
danger
arbitrary
capricious
death
penalty
met
carefully
drafted
statute
ensures
sentencing
authority
given
adequate
information
guidance
requirement
jury
find
one
aggravating
circumstances
listed
death
penalty
statute
direction
jury
consider
mitigating
circumstances
georgia
statute
properly
confined
directed
jury
attention
circumstances
particular
crime
characteristics
person
committed
crime
similarly
woodson
north
carolina
plurality
held
mandatory
death
sentencing
permissible
response
problem
arbitrary
jury
discretion
history
capital
punishment
shown
approach
problem
discretion
succeed
eighth
amendment
required
individual
given
due
fundamental
respect
humanity
underlying
eight
amendment
requires
consideration
character
record
individual
offender
circumstances
particular
offense
constitutionally
indispensable
part
process
inflicting
penalty
death
see
roberts
harry
louisiana
roberts
stanislaus
louisiana
thus
rule
lockett
followed
earlier
decisions
insistence
capital
punishment
imposed
fairly
reasonable
consistency
requiring
sentencer
permitted
focus
characteristics
person
committed
crime
gregg
georgia
supra
rule
lockett
recognizes
justice
requires
taken
account
circumstances
offense
together
character
propensities
offender
pennsylvania
ashe
holding
sentencer
capital
cases
must
permitted
consider
relevant
mitigating
factor
rule
lockett
recognizes
consistency
produced
ignoring
individual
differences
false
consistency
iii
apply
rule
lockett
circumstances
case
trial
judge
stated
following
law
consider
fact
young
man
violent
background
app
dispute
violent
background
trial
judge
referring
mitigating
evidence
eddings
family
history
statement
clear
trial
judge
evaluate
evidence
mitigation
find
wanting
matter
fact
rather
found
matter
law
unable
even
consider
evidence
criminal
appeals
took
approach
found
evidence
mitigation
relevant
tend
provide
legal
excuse
criminal
responsibility
thus
conceded
eddings
personality
disorder
cast
evidence
aside
basis
knew
difference
right
wrong
test
criminal
responsibility
similarly
evidence
eddings
family
history
useful
explaining
behavior
excuse
behaviour
statements
appears
criminal
appeals
also
considered
evidence
mitigating
tend
support
legal
excuse
criminal
liability
find
limitations
placed
courts
upon
mitigating
evidence
consider
violated
rule
lockett
state
may
statute
preclude
sentencer
considering
mitigating
factor
neither
may
sentencer
refuse
consider
matter
law
relevant
mitigating
evidence
instance
trial
judge
instructed
jury
disregard
mitigating
evidence
eddings
proffered
behalf
sentencer
criminal
appeals
review
may
determine
weight
given
relevant
mitigating
evidence
may
give
weight
excluding
evidence
consideration
doubt
evidence
eddings
offered
relevant
mitigating
evidence
eddings
youth
years
time
murder
evidence
difficult
family
history
emotional
disturbance
typically
introduced
defendants
mitigation
see
mcgautha
california
cases
evidence
properly
may
given
little
weight
defendant
years
old
time
offense
doubt
evidence
turbulent
family
history
beatings
harsh
father
severe
emotional
disturbance
particularly
relevant
trial
judge
recognized
youth
must
considered
relevant
mitigating
factor
youth
chronological
fact
time
condition
life
person
may
susceptible
influence
psychological
damage
history
replete
laws
judicial
recognition
minors
especially
earlier
years
generally
less
mature
responsible
adults
particularly
formative
years
childhood
adolescence
minors
often
lack
experience
perspective
judgment
expected
adults
bellotti
baird
even
normal
customarily
lacks
maturity
adult
case
eddings
normal
deprived
care
concern
paternal
attention
children
deserve
contrary
disputed
juvenile
serious
emotional
problems
raised
neglectful
sometimes
even
violent
family
background
addition
testimony
eddings
mental
emotional
development
level
several
years
chronological
age
suggest
absence
responsibility
crime
murder
deliberately
committed
case
rather
say
chronological
age
minor
relevant
mitigating
factor
great
weight
must
background
mental
emotional
development
youthful
defendant
duly
considered
sentencing
unaware
extent
minors
engage
increasingly
violent
crime
suggest
absence
legal
responsibility
crime
committed
minor
concerned
manner
imposition
ultimate
penalty
death
sentence
imposed
crime
murder
upon
emotionally
disturbed
youth
disturbed
child
immaturity
remand
state
courts
must
consider
relevant
mitigating
evidence
weigh
evidence
aggravating
circumstances
weight
evidence
accordingly
judgment
reversed
extent
sustains
imposition
death
penalty
case
remanded
proceedings
inconsistent
opinion
ordered
footnotes
psychiatrist
suggested
time
murder
eddings
mind
shooting
stepfather
policeman
married
mother
brief
period
eddings
seven
psychiatrist
stated
think
given
circumstances
facts
life
facts
arrested
development
acted
seven
year
old
seeking
revenge
rebellion
act
pull
trigger
kill
someone
even
think
knew
trial
judge
found
first
crime
heinous
atrocious
cruel
designed
inflict
high
degree
pain
utter
indifference
rights
patrolman
crabtree
second
judge
found
crime
committed
purpose
avoiding
preventing
lawful
arrest
prosecution
evidence
sufficient
indicate
time
offense
eddings
wish
returned
missouri
stopping
car
officer
intent
make
lawful
arrest
finally
trial
judge
found
eddings
posed
continuing
threat
violence
society
evidence
one
point
day
murder
eddings
taken
county
jail
told
two
officers
loose
shoot
also
evidence
another
time
officer
refused
turn
light
eddings
cell
eddings
became
angry
threatened
officer
shot
one
people
get
turn
light
based
two
spontaneous
utterances
trial
judge
found
strong
likelihood
eddings
commit
criminal
act
violence
released
understand
criminal
appeals
hold
murder
police
officer
performance
duties
heinous
atrocious
cruel
oklahoma
statute
see
roberts
louisiana
however
doubt
trial
judge
understanding
application
aggravating
circumstance
conformed
degree
certainty
required
decision
godfrey
georgia
see
supra
decide
case
basis
lockett
ohio
reach
question
whether
light
contemporary
standards
eighth
amendment
forbids
execution
defendant
time
offense
cf
bell
ohio
jury
attention
focused
characteristics
person
committed
crime
special
facts
defendant
mitigate
imposing
capital
punishment
youth
extent
cooperation
police
emotional
state
time
crime
process
accords
significance
relevant
facets
character
record
individual
offender
circumstances
particular
offense
excludes
consideration
fixing
ultimate
punishment
death
possibility
compassionate
mitigating
factors
stemming
diverse
frailties
humankind
treats
persons
convicted
designated
offense
uniquely
individual
human
beings
brief
respondent
inference
drawn
consider
petitioner
juvenile
record
family
life
mitigating
circumstance
tr
oral
arg
trial
consider
fact
family
background
mitigating
circumstance
violent
background
assume
meant
eddings
subject
slapping
around
beating
father
argument
respondent
eddings
argued
criminal
appeals
imposition
death
penalty
particular
circumstances
case
light
mitigating
factors
present
excessive
punishment
eight
amendment
specifically
argue
trial
judge
erred
refusing
consider
relevant
mitigating
circumstances
process
sentencing
rejecting
claim
excessive
punishment
examined
aggravating
mitigating
circumstances
held
eddings
family
history
emotional
disorder
mitigating
circumstances
weighed
balance
holding
factors
irrelevant
inquiry
excessiveness
also
holding
need
considered
sentencer
imposing
capital
punishment
similarly
eddings
argument
petition
certiorari
imposition
death
penalty
excessive
facts
case
comprises
argument
sentencer
erred
refusing
consider
relevant
mitigating
circumstances
proffered
sentencing
hearing
short
although
neither
opinion
criminal
appeals
eddings
petition
certiorari
spoke
decision
lockett
name
question
whether
decisions
consistent
decision
lockett
properly
us
jurisdiction
depend
citation
book
verse
see
new
york
ex
rel
bryant
zimmerman
although
eddings
petition
certiorari
expressly
present
lockett
issue
brief
argued
state
responded
argument
brief
petitioner
brief
respondent
dissenting
opinion
chief
justice
post
courts
afforded
opportunity
consider
issue
fact
however
petition
criminal
appeals
rehearing
eddings
specifically
presented
issue
considerable
length
see
petition
supporting
brief
interpretation
mitigating
circumstances
effectively
limited
scope
mitigation
limitation
renders
oklahoma
death
penalty
statute
unconstitutional
criminal
appeals
denied
petition
stating
given
full
consideration
fully
advised
premises
see
rule
rules
criminal
appeals
entertain
new
arguments
upon
petition
rehearing
cf
cox
broadcasting
cohn
see
also
wood
georgia
beck
alabama
vachon
new
hampshire
note
oklahoma
death
penalty
statute
permits
defendant
present
evidence
mitigating
circumstances
okla
tit
lockett
requires
sentencer
listen
adolescents
everywhere
every
walk
life
often
dangerous
others
president
commission
law
enforcement
administration
justice
task
force
report
juvenile
delinquency
youth
crime
dolescents
particularly
early
middle
teen
years
vulnerable
impulsive
less
adults
crimes
committed
youths
may
harmful
victims
committed
older
persons
deserve
less
punishment
adolescents
may
less
capacity
control
conduct
think
terms
adults
moreover
youth
crime
exclusively
offender
fault
offenses
young
also
represent
failure
family
school
social
system
share
responsibility
development
america
youth
twentieth
century
fund
task
force
sentencing
policy
toward
young
offenders
confronting
youth
crime
justice
frankfurter
stated
hildren
special
place
life
law
reflect
may
anderson
concurring
opinion
indeed
law
reflect
special
place
every
state
country
makes
separate
provision
juvenile
offenders
see
gault
see
national
advisory
committee
criminal
justice
standards
goals
task
force
report
juvenile
justice
delinquency
prevention
justice
brennan
concurring
join
opinion
without
however
departing
view
death
penalty
circumstances
cruel
unusual
punishment
prohibited
eighth
fourteenth
amendments
gregg
georgia
dissenting
opinion
justice
concurring
write
separately
address
fully
reasons
case
must
remanded
light
lockett
ohio
requires
trial
consider
weigh
mitigating
evidence
concerning
petitioner
family
background
personal
history
sentences
death
qualitatively
different
prison
sentences
woodson
north
carolina
opinion
stewart
powell
stevens
jj
gone
extraordinary
measures
ensure
prisoner
sentenced
executed
afforded
process
guarantee
much
humanly
possible
sentence
imposed
whim
passion
prejudice
mistake
surely
less
required
defendant
minor
one
example
measures
taken
lockett
ohio
supra
plurality
wrote
perfect
procedure
deciding
cases
governmental
authority
used
impose
death
statute
prevents
sentencer
capital
cases
giving
independent
mitigating
weight
aspects
defendant
character
record
circumstances
offense
proffered
mitigation
creates
risk
death
penalty
imposed
spite
factors
may
call
less
severe
penalty
choice
life
death
risk
unacceptable
incompatible
commands
eighth
fourteenth
amendments
opinion
burger
present
case
course
relevant
oklahoma
statute
permits
defendant
present
evidence
mitigating
circumstance
see
okla
tit
nonetheless
sentencing
petitioner
occurred
one
month
lockett
decided
judge
remarked
following
law
consider
fact
young
man
violent
background
app
although
one
reasonably
argue
extemporaneous
remarks
legal
significance
believe
reasoning
plurality
opinion
lockett
compels
remand
risk
death
penalty
imposed
spite
factors
may
call
less
severe
penalty
disagree
suggestion
dissent
remanding
case
may
serve
useful
purpose
even
though
petitioner
opportunity
present
evidence
mitigation
crime
appears
trial
judge
believed
consider
mitigating
evidence
imposing
sentence
event
may
speculate
whether
trial
judge
criminal
appeals
actually
considered
mitigating
factors
found
insufficient
offset
aggravating
circumstances
whether
difference
opinion
trial
treatment
petitioner
evidence
purely
matter
semantics
suggested
dissent
woodson
lockett
require
us
remove
legitimate
basis
finding
ambiguity
concerning
factors
actually
considered
trial
chief
justice
may
correct
concluding
opinion
reflects
decision
justices
imposed
death
penalty
case
sat
trial
judge
see
post
however
read
opinion
either
altering
opinions
establishing
constitutionality
death
penalty
deciding
issue
whether
constitution
permits
imposition
death
penalty
individual
committed
murder
age
rather
listing
detail
circumstances
surrounding
petitioner
life
sought
emphasize
variety
mitigating
information
may
considered
trial
deciding
whether
impose
death
penalty
lesser
sentence
despite
chief
justice
argument
may
consider
lockett
issue
never
fairly
presented
precedent
consider
merits
issue
wood
georgia
wrote
even
one
considers
question
technically
raised
ample
support
remand
required
interests
justice
see
authorizing
require
proceedings
may
circumstances
trial
failure
consider
mitigating
evidence
risks
erroneous
imposition
death
sentence
plain
violation
lockett
duty
remand
case
resentencing
chief
justice
burger
justice
white
justice
blackmun
justice
rehnquist
join
dissenting
important
outset
remember
narrow
question
granted
certiorari
took
care
limit
consideration
whether
eighth
fourteenth
amendments
prohibit
imposition
death
sentence
offender
years
old
time
committed
offense
review
questions
raised
petition
certiorari
denied
yet
today
goes
beyond
issue
review
sought
granted
decide
case
point
raised
first
time
petitioner
brief
claim
neither
presented
oklahoma
courts
presented
petition
certiorari
relying
claim
strains
construct
plausible
legal
theory
support
mandate
relief
granted
lockett
ohio
considered
whether
ohio
violated
eighth
fourteenth
amendments
sentencing
lockett
death
statute
narrowly
limit
ed
sentencer
discretion
consider
circumstances
crime
record
character
offender
mitigating
factors
statute
issue
ohio
rev
code
required
trial
impose
death
penalty
upon
lockett
conviction
aggravated
murder
specifications
unless
found
victim
induced
facilitated
offense
unlikely
lockett
committed
offense
fact
duress
coercion
strong
provocation
offense
primarily
product
lockett
psychosis
mental
deficiency
plain
although
guilty
felony
homicide
ohio
law
lockett
played
relatively
minor
role
robbery
resulted
homicide
actually
perpetrated
hand
another
lockett
previously
committed
major
offenses
addition
psychological
report
described
prognosis
rehabilitation
favorable
however
since
found
acted
duress
suffer
psychosis
mentally
deficient
sentencing
judge
concluded
alternative
whether
like
law
impose
death
penalty
ibid
held
lockett
eighth
fourteenth
amendments
require
sentencer
precluded
considering
mitigating
factor
aspect
defendant
character
record
circumstances
offense
defendant
proffers
basis
sentence
less
death
emphasis
original
therefore
found
ohio
statute
flawed
permit
individualized
consideration
mitigating
circumstances
defendant
comparatively
minor
role
offense
lack
intent
kill
victim
age
however
undertake
dictate
weight
sentencing
must
ascribe
various
factors
might
categorized
mitigating
way
suggest
may
substitute
sentencing
judgment
state
courts
capital
cases
contrast
ohio
statute
issue
lockett
oklahoma
death
penalty
statute
provides
sentencing
proceeding
evidence
may
presented
mitigating
circumstances
aggravating
circumstances
enumerated
act
okla
tit
emphasis
added
nless
least
one
statutory
aggravating
circumstances
enumerated
act
found
exist
beyond
reasonable
doubt
found
aggravating
circumstance
outweighed
finding
one
mitigating
circumstances
death
penalty
shall
imposed
oklahoma
statute
thus
contains
provisions
virtually
identical
cited
approval
lockett
examples
proper
legislation
highlighted
ohio
statute
constitutional
infirmities
indeed
contend
oklahoma
sentencing
provisions
inconsistent
lockett
moreover
recognizes
mandated
oklahoma
statute
eddings
permitted
present
substantial
evidence
sentencing
hearing
troubled
youth
ante
attempt
make
violation
lockett
relies
entirely
single
sentence
trial
opinion
delivered
bench
close
sentencing
hearing
discussing
aggravated
nature
petitioner
offense
noting
given
serious
consideration
youth
defendant
particular
crime
committed
trial
judge
said
persuaded
entirely
fact
youth
sixteen
years
old
heinous
crime
committed
following
law
opinion
consider
fact
young
man
violent
background
app
parsing
trial
oral
statement
ignores
fact
judge
delivering
opinion
extemporaneously
bench
expected
frame
utterance
specificity
precision
might
expected
written
opinion
statute
extemporaneous
courtroom
statements
often
models
clarity
give
weight
fact
trial
spent
considerable
time
listening
testimony
probation
officer
various
mental
health
professionals
described
eddings
personality
family
history
obviously
meaningless
exercise
asserts
judge
believed
barred
matter
law
considering
testimony
yet
even
examined
isolation
trial
statement
best
ambiguous
easily
read
say
taken
account
eddings
unfortunate
childhood
consider
either
youth
family
background
sufficient
offset
aggravating
circumstances
evidence
revealed
certainly
nothing
lockett
preclude
making
determination
oklahoma
criminal
appeals
independently
examined
evidence
aggravating
mitigating
factors
presented
eddings
sentencing
hearing
reviewing
testimony
concerning
eddings
personality
family
background
referring
trial
discussion
mitigating
circumstances
stated
eddings
family
history
useful
explaining
behaved
way
excuse
behavior
emphasis
added
concludes
criminal
appeals
also
considered
evidence
mitigating
tend
support
legal
excuse
criminal
liability
ante
however
reason
read
statements
reflecting
anything
conclusion
eddings
background
sufficiently
mitigating
factor
tip
scales
given
aggravating
circumstances
including
eddings
statements
immediately
killing
criminal
appeals
assuredly
opinion
suggests
hold
evidence
mitigation
relevant
see
ibid
indeed
criminal
appeals
thought
evidence
irrelevant
unlikely
spent
several
paragraphs
summarizing
opinion
offers
reasonable
explanation
assumption
criminal
appeals
considered
bound
unstated
legal
principle
consider
eddings
background
sure
neither
criminal
appeals
trial
labeled
eddings
family
background
personality
disturbance
mitigating
factors
plain
however
purely
matter
semantics
associated
rational
belief
evidence
mitigation
must
rise
certain
level
persuasiveness
said
constitute
mitigating
circumstance
contrast
seems
require
potentially
mitigating
evidence
described
mitigating
factor
regardless
weight
insubstantiality
evidence
simply
factor
process
weighing
evidence
aggravating
circumstances
yet
opinion
stands
provides
scant
support
result
reached
clearly
choice
oklahoma
courts
choice
inconsistent
lockett
decision
accord
relatively
little
weight
eddings
family
background
emotional
problems
balanced
circumstances
crime
potential
future
dangerousness
ii
never
less
painful
duties
pass
capital
cases
case
one
however
comes
time
every
case
must
bite
bullet
whether
remand
serve
useful
purpose
remains
seen
petitioner
already
given
opportunity
introduce
whatever
evidence
considered
relevant
sentencing
determination
two
oklahoma
courts
weighed
evidence
found
insufficient
offset
aggravating
circumstances
shown
state
opinion
makes
clear
justices
join
imposed
death
penalty
sat
sentencing
authority
see
ante
indeed
sure
done
constitution
authorize
us
determine
whether
sentences
imposed
state
courts
sentences
consider
appropriate
authority
decide
whether
constitutional
eight
amendment
stops
far
short
suggesting
constitutional
proscription
imposition
death
penalty
person
age
murder
committed
last
analysis
forced
conclude
state
courts
must
consider
petitioner
mitigating
evidence
weigh
evidence
aggravating
circumstances
weigh
evidence
ante
sentencing
proceedings
case
sense
inconsistent
lockett
ohio
decide
sole
issue
granted
certiorari
affirm
judgment
struggles
demonstrate
question
whether
decisions
consistent
decision
lockett
properly
us
ante
argues
petitioner
lockett
claim
somehow
inherent
general
assertion
death
penalty
excessive
however
obvious
petitioner
failed
present
question
addresses
also
never
fairly
presented
lockett
argument
state
courts
afforded
first
opportunity
apply
controlling
legal
principles
facts
bearing
upon
constitutional
claim
picard
connor
indeed
petitioner
concedes
much
admitting
lockett
error
enumerated
argued
appeal
oklahoma
criminal
appeals
brief
petitioner
case
evidence
showed
lockett
waited
getaway
car
three
companions
robbed
store
robbery
proprietor
fatally
wounded
lockett
charged
aggravated
murder
two
specifications
aggravating
circumstances
murder
committed
purpose
escaping
detection
apprehension
trial
punishment
aggravated
robbery
murder
committed
committing
attempting
commit
fleeing
immediately
committing
attempting
commit
aggravated
robbery
see
ohio
rev
code
ironic
petition
certiorari
filed
oklahoma
criminal
appeals
petitioner
asserted
oklahoma
sentencing
scheme
constitutionally
deficient
mitigating
circumstances
may
considered
statutorily
defined
limited
emphasis
added
although
think
immaterial
correct
decision
case
worth
noting
overstates
oversimplifies
evidence
presented
eddings
sentencing
hearing
example
twice
characterizes
testimony
indicating
time
crime
eddings
mental
emotional
development
level
several
years
age
ante
dietsche
psychologist
testified
forced
extrapolate
wechsler
adult
intelligence
scale
place
petitioner
mental
age
years
months
however
said
mental
age
meaning
since
mental
age
concepts
break
fourteen
sixteen
years
age
went
state
opinion
eddings
intelligence
adult
app
emphasis
added
describing
single
interview
petitioner
awaiting
trial
murder
charges
rettig
sociologist
said
petitioner
responses
appeared
several
years
chronological
age
qualif
ied
answer
however
noting
petitioner
great
deal
constraint
atmosphere
saw
finally
gagliano
psychiatrist
opined
basis
interview
petitioner
attorney
present
refused
allow
questioning
petitioner
mental
status
day
shooting
time
petitioner
pulled
trigger
acted
seven
year
old
seeking
revenge
rebellion
stepfather
policeman
gagliano
also
willing
state
categorically
basis
single
interview
without
reference
results
psychological
testing
eddings
eddings
preordained
commit
murder
time
parents
divorced
five
sort
determinist
approach
rejected
overwhelming
majority
psychiatrists
even
clear
trial
meant
eddings
violent
background
example
eddings
probation
officer
testified
eddings
problems
fighting
school
charged
assault
intent
great
bodily
harm
state
seems
concede
however
probably
referring
least
part
eddings
family
history
see
brief
respondent
inference
drawn
consider
petitioner
juvenile
record
family
life
mitigating
circumstances
emphasis
added
cf
tr
oral
arg
remark
ambiguous
interpreted
mean
trial
going
consider
juvenile
previous
juvenile
record
missouri
extensive
hand
opinion
concedes
petitioner
youth
given
serious
consideration
mitigating
circumstance
although
age
time
offense
tend
support
legal
excuse
criminal
responsibility
eddings
companions
informed
officer
patrol
car
approaching
eddings
responded
mother
pig
tried
stop
going
blow
away
app
choice
necessarily
unreasonable
one
notes
vidence
difficult
family
history
emotional
disturbance
typically
introduced
defendants
mitigation
ante
one
might
even
surprised
person
capable
brutal
unprovoked
killing
police
officer
suffer
sort
personality
disorder
indeed
dietsche
testified
eddings
sociopathic
antisocial
personality
see
ante
estimated
criminal
element
test
sociopathic
antisocial
app
dietsche
defined
antisocial
personalities
individuals
without
usual
type
companions
loyalties
requently
selfish
impulsive
showing
little
line
responsibility
concern
needs
wants
others
hav
ing
little
line
guilt
remorse
although
describes
dietsche
testimony
indicating
approximately
youths
suffering
disorder
grew
aged
ante
dietsche
fact
describing
study
thought
subsequently
discredited
app
even
study
however
concluded
grew
disorder
age
type
assaultive
type
ibid
recent
study
estimated
sociopathic
persons
treatable
study
initial
participants
successfully
treated
literally
thousands
hours
therapy
thus
characterization
eddings
sociopath
may
connote
little
egocentric
concerned
desires
unremorseful
propensity
criminal
conduct
unlikely
respond
well
conventional
psychiatric
treatment
hardly
significant
mitigating
factors
see
blocker
app
nn
nn
burger
concurring
result
speaks
eddings
severe
emotional
disturbance
ante
see
also
ante
appears
referring
primarily
testimony
eddings
sociopath
gagliano
rather
fantastic
speculation
concerning
eddings
dissociation
time
crime
see
supra
opinion
exemplifies
proposition
occurrence
crime
functions
powerful
impetus
search
theory
explain
see
szasz
psychiatry
ethics
criminal
law
colum
rev