smith
murray
argued
march
decided
june
prior
petitioner
trial
virginia
state
murder
woman
examined
psychiatrist
appointed
request
counsel
examination
psychiatrist
asked
petitioner
murder
prior
incidents
deviant
sexual
conduct
petitioner
stated
tore
clothes
girl
school
bus
deciding
rape
following
jury
trial
petitioner
convicted
sentencing
phase
prosecution
called
psychiatrist
stand
defense
objection
described
incident
school
bus
evidence
presented
prosecution
petitioner
jury
recommended
death
sentence
appeal
virginia
petitioner
raised
number
claims
assign
error
concerning
admission
psychiatrist
testimony
counsel
later
explaining
postconviction
hearing
decided
pursue
claim
determining
virginia
case
law
support
position
time
affirmed
conviction
sentence
addressing
issues
concerning
prosecution
use
psychiatric
testimony
rule
errors
assigned
appellant
considered
exhausting
state
remedies
petitioner
sought
writ
habeas
corpus
federal
district
denied
petition
appeals
affirmed
held
petitioner
defaulted
underlying
constitutional
claim
admission
psychiatrist
testimony
failing
press
virginia
direct
appeal
murray
carrier
ante
pp
petitioner
carried
burden
showing
cause
noncompliance
virginia
rules
procedure
deliberate
tactical
decision
pursue
particular
claim
antithesis
kind
circumstance
warrant
excusing
defendant
failure
adhere
state
rules
fair
orderly
disposition
criminal
cases
counsel
decision
press
claim
question
error
magnitude
rendered
performance
constitutionally
deficient
test
strickland
washington
petitioner
rely
novelty
claim
cause
noncompliance
virginia
rules
appears
various
forms
claim
percolating
lower
courts
years
time
petitioner
original
appeal
pp
clear
record
application
cause
prejudice
test
result
fundamental
miscarriage
justice
alleged
constitutional
error
neither
precluded
development
true
facts
resulted
admission
false
ones
thus
even
assuming
legal
matter
psychiatrist
testimony
presented
jury
admission
pervert
jury
deliberations
concerning
ultimate
question
whether
fact
petitioner
constituted
continuing
threat
society
pp
delivered
opinion
burger
white
powell
rehnquist
joined
brennan
filed
dissenting
opinion
marshall
joined
ante
stevens
filed
dissenting
opinion
marshall
blackmun
joined
parts
ii
iii
brennan
joined
post
lloyd
snook
iii
appointment
argued
cause
petitioner
briefs
richard
bonnie
james
kulp
senior
assistant
attorney
general
virginia
argued
cause
respondent
brief
william
broaddus
attorney
general
frank
ferguson
assistant
attorney
general
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
filed
american
psychiatric
association
et
al
joel
klein
joseph
onek
peter
scheer
american
psychological
association
bruce
ennis
donald
bersoff
new
jersey
department
public
advocate
linda
rosenzweig
justice
delivered
opinion
granted
certiorari
decide
whether
circumstances
prosecutor
may
elicit
testimony
mental
health
professional
concerning
content
interview
conducted
explore
possibility
presenting
psychiatric
defenses
trial
also
agreed
review
appeals
determination
error
admission
psychiatrist
evidence
case
irrelevant
holding
zant
stephens
examination
however
conclude
petitioner
defaulted
underlying
constitutional
claim
failing
press
virginia
direct
appeal
accordingly
decline
address
merits
petitioner
claims
affirm
judgment
dismissing
petition
writ
habeas
corpus
following
jury
trial
petitioner
convicted
may
murder
audrey
weiler
according
confession
petitioner
encountered
weiler
secluded
area
near
home
raped
knifepoint
fearing
testimony
send
back
prison
grabbed
neck
choked
fell
unconscious
realized
still
alive
dragged
nearby
river
submerged
head
repeatedly
stabbed
knife
subsequent
medical
examination
indicated
death
attributable
three
clusters
lethal
injuries
asphyxia
strangulation
drowning
multiple
stab
wounds
prior
trial
petitioner
appointed
counsel
david
pugh
explored
possibility
presenting
number
psychiatric
defenses
towards
end
pugh
requested
trial
appoint
private
psychiatrist
wendell
pile
conduct
examination
petitioner
aware
psychiatric
reports
routinely
forwarded
reports
admissible
virginia
law
pugh
advised
petitioner
discuss
prior
criminal
episodes
anyone
app
see
gibson
commonwealth
although
general
advice
intended
apply
forthcoming
psychiatric
examination
pugh
later
testified
specifically
tell
petitioner
say
anything
doctor
pile
offense
offenses
app
course
examination
pile
fact
ask
petitioner
murder
prior
incidents
deviant
sexual
conduct
tr
state
habeas
hearing
although
petitioner
initially
declined
answer
later
stated
torn
clothes
girl
school
bus
deciding
carry
original
plan
rape
app
information
together
tentative
diagnosis
sociopathic
personality
sexual
deviation
rape
forwarded
trial
copies
sent
pugh
prosecutor
trying
case
commonwealth
point
prior
interview
pile
inform
petitioner
statements
might
later
used
right
remain
silent
counsel
present
desired
cf
estelle
smith
sentencing
phase
trial
commonwealth
called
pile
stand
defense
objection
pile
described
incident
school
bus
tr
repeated
earlier
conclusion
petitioner
sociopathic
personality
examining
second
psychiatrist
commonwealth
introduced
petitioner
criminal
record
evidence
revealed
convicted
rape
paroled
penitentiary
charge
less
four
months
prior
raping
murdering
weiler
defense
called
character
witnesses
testified
petitioner
regular
churchgoer
member
choir
conscientious
student
high
school
good
soldier
vietnam
lengthy
deliberation
jury
recommended
petitioner
sentenced
death
petitioner
appealed
conviction
sentence
virginia
brief
raised
separate
claims
including
broad
challenge
constitutionality
virginia
death
penalty
provisions
objections
several
trial
evidentiary
rulings
challenge
exclusion
prospective
juror
voir
dire
petitioner
however
assign
error
concerning
admission
pile
testimony
subsequent
state
postconviction
hearing
pugh
explained
consciously
decided
pursue
claim
determining
virginia
case
law
support
position
particular
time
app
various
objections
commonwealth
use
pile
testimony
raised
however
brief
filed
amicus
curiae
assistance
project
university
virginia
law
school
virginia
affirmed
conviction
sentence
respects
smith
commonwealth
noted
pursuant
rule
considered
arguments
advanced
amicus
concerned
errors
specifically
assigned
defendant
accordingly
address
issues
concerning
prosecution
use
psychiatric
testimony
denied
subsequent
petition
certiorari
urge
claim
admission
pile
testimony
violated
petitioner
rights
federal
constitution
petitioner
sought
writ
habeas
corpus
circuit
city
williamsburg
county
james
city
first
time
since
trial
argued
admission
pile
testimony
violated
privilege
fifth
fourteenth
amendments
federal
constitution
ruled
however
petitioner
forfeited
claim
failing
press
earlier
proceedings
subsequent
evidentiary
hearing
conducted
solely
issue
ineffective
assistance
counsel
heard
testimony
concerning
reasons
underlying
pugh
decision
pursue
fifth
amendment
claim
appeal
basis
testimony
found
pugh
assistant
researched
question
determined
claim
unlikely
succeed
thus
found
counsel
exercised
reasonable
judgment
deciding
preserve
objection
appeal
decision
resulted
informed
professional
deliberation
app
pet
cert
petitioner
appealed
denial
habeas
petition
virginia
contending
circuit
erred
finding
objection
admission
pile
testimony
defaulted
declined
accept
appeal
smith
morris
cxliii
denied
certiorari
exhausted
state
remedies
petitioner
sought
writ
habeas
corpus
district
eastern
district
virginia
unpublished
order
denied
petition
holding
objection
admission
pile
testimony
clearly
barred
decision
wainwright
sykes
app
reaching
conclusion
district
judge
noted
default
resulted
trial
attorney
ignorance
inadvertence
deliberate
tactical
decision
ibid
appeals
fourth
circuit
affirmed
different
grounds
smith
procunier
finding
unnecessary
rely
procedural
default
address
merits
substantive
constitutional
claim
held
admission
pile
testimony
even
erroneous
basis
invalidating
petitioner
sentence
noted
jury
relied
two
distinct
aggravating
factors
decision
recommend
death
penalty
psychiatric
testimony
however
bore
one
factors
likelihood
petitioner
constitute
continuing
serious
threat
society
code
tr
circumstance
appeals
believed
decision
zant
stephens
required
conclusion
error
irrelevant
overall
validity
sentence
granted
certiorari
smith
sielaff
affirm
authority
decision
murray
carrier
ante
ii
virginia
law
failure
raise
claim
direct
appeal
criminal
conviction
ordinarily
bars
consideration
claim
subsequent
state
proceeding
see
coppola
warden
virginia
state
penitentiary
slayton
parrigan
present
case
virginia
courts
enforced
rule
declining
consider
petitioner
objection
admission
pile
testimony
claim
concededly
included
initial
appeal
conviction
sentence
consistent
earlier
intimations
reed
ross
held
murray
carrier
ante
federal
habeas
must
evaluate
appellate
defaults
standards
apply
defendant
fails
preserve
claim
trial
accordingly
although
federal
courts
times
retain
power
look
beyond
state
procedural
forfeitures
exercise
power
ordinarily
inappropriate
unless
defendant
succeeds
showing
cause
noncompliance
state
rule
actual
prejudice
resulting
alleged
constitutional
violation
wainwright
sykes
supra
murray
carrier
ante
explained
fully
carrier
congruence
standards
appellate
trial
default
reflects
judgment
concerns
finality
comity
virtually
identical
regardless
timing
defendant
failure
comply
legitimate
state
rules
procedure
need
determine
whether
petitioner
carried
burden
showing
actual
prejudice
allegedly
improper
admission
pile
testimony
think
failed
demonstrate
cause
noncompliance
virginia
procedures
declined
past
essay
comprehensive
catalog
circumstances
justify
finding
cause
reed
ross
supra
see
also
wainwright
sykes
supra
cases
however
leave
doubt
deliberate
tactical
decision
pursue
particular
claim
antithesis
kind
circumstance
warrant
excusing
defendant
failure
adhere
state
legitimate
rules
fair
orderly
disposition
criminal
cases
explained
reed
efense
counsel
may
make
tactical
decision
forgo
procedural
opportunity
instance
object
trial
raise
issue
appeal
discovers
tactic
unsuccessful
pursue
alternative
strategy
federal
encouragement
conduct
federal
habeas
corpus
review
offend
generally
accepted
principles
comity
undermine
accuracy
efficiency
state
judicial
systems
detriment
concerned
procedural
defaults
nature
therefore
inexcusable
qualify
cause
purposes
federal
habeas
corpus
review
internal
quotation
citation
omitted
notwithstanding
deliberate
nature
decision
pursue
objection
pile
testimony
appeal
course
conduct
virtually
dispositive
effort
satisfy
syke
cause
requirement
petitioner
contends
default
excused
pugh
decision
though
deliberate
made
ignorance
investigated
claim
fully
petitioner
maintains
inconceivable
concluded
claim
without
merit
failed
raise
reply
brief
petitioner
argument
squarely
foreclosed
decision
carrier
holds
mere
fact
counsel
failed
recognize
factual
legal
basis
claim
failed
raise
claim
despite
recognizing
constitute
cause
procedural
default
ante
see
also
engle
isaac
supra
seriously
maintained
decision
press
claim
appeal
error
magnitude
rendered
counsel
performance
constitutionally
deficient
test
strickland
washington
carrier
reaffirmed
right
effective
assistance
counsel
may
particular
case
violated
even
isolated
error
error
sufficiently
egregious
prejudicial
ante
see
also
cronic
counsel
deliberate
decision
pursue
objection
admission
pile
testimony
falls
far
short
meeting
rigorous
standard
conducting
vigorous
defense
guilt
sentencing
phases
trial
counsel
surveyed
extensive
transcript
researched
number
claims
decided
current
state
law
worth
pursuing
direct
appeal
process
winnowing
weaker
arguments
appeal
focusing
likely
prevail
far
evidence
incompetence
hallmark
effective
appellate
advocacy
jones
barnes
often
case
even
informed
counsel
fail
anticipate
state
appellate
willingness
reconsider
prior
holding
underestimate
likelihood
federal
habeas
repudiate
established
state
rule
strickland
washington
made
clear
fair
assessment
attorney
performance
requires
every
effort
made
eliminate
distorting
effects
hindsight
reconstruct
circumstances
counsel
challenged
conduct
evaluate
conduct
counsel
perspective
time
viewed
light
virginia
law
time
pugh
submitted
opening
brief
virginia
decision
pursue
objection
admission
pile
testimony
fell
well
within
wide
range
professionally
competent
assistance
required
sixth
amendment
federal
constitution
petitioner
rely
novelty
legal
claim
cause
noncompliance
virginia
rules
see
reed
ross
constitutional
claim
novel
legal
basis
reasonably
available
counsel
defendant
cause
failure
raise
claim
accordance
applicable
state
procedures
petitioner
contends
decisions
estelle
smith
ake
oklahoma
decided
well
affirmance
conviction
sentence
direct
appeal
lend
support
position
pile
testimony
excluded
comparison
reed
engle
makes
plain
question
whether
subsequent
legal
developments
made
counsel
task
easier
whether
time
default
claim
available
petitioner
candidly
conceded
various
forms
claim
advances
percolating
lower
courts
years
time
original
appeal
brief
petitioner
reply
brief
petitioner
moreover
case
amicus
virginia
specifically
argued
admission
pile
testimony
violated
petitioner
rights
fifth
sixth
amendments
brief
assistance
project
university
virginia
law
school
amicus
curiae
pp
circumstances
simply
open
argument
legal
basis
claim
petitioner
presses
federal
habeas
unavailable
counsel
time
direct
appeal
conclude
therefore
petitioner
carried
burden
showing
cause
noncompliance
virginia
rules
procedure
determination
however
end
inquiry
noted
engle
reaffirmed
carrier
appropriate
cases
principles
comity
finality
inform
concepts
cause
prejudice
must
yield
imperative
correcting
fundamentally
unjust
incarceration
murray
carrier
ante
quoting
engle
isaac
supra
accordingly
constitutional
violation
probably
resulted
conviction
one
actually
innocent
federal
habeas
may
grant
writ
even
absence
showing
cause
procedural
default
murray
carrier
ante
acknowledge
concept
actual
distinct
legal
innocence
translate
easily
context
alleged
error
sentencing
phase
trial
capital
offense
nonetheless
think
clear
record
application
cause
prejudice
test
result
fundamental
miscarriage
justice
engle
allegation
testimony
school
bus
incident
false
way
misleading
argued
prospect
pile
might
later
testify
effect
foreclosing
meaningful
exploration
psychiatric
defenses
concern
real
one
abstract
record
clearly
shows
pile
ask
petitioner
discuss
crime
stood
accused
committing
well
prior
incidents
deviant
sexual
conduct
although
initially
reluctant
ultimately
petitioner
forthcoming
subjects
short
alleged
constitutional
error
neither
precluded
development
true
facts
resulted
admission
false
ones
thus
even
assuming
legal
matter
pile
testimony
presented
jury
admission
serve
pervert
jury
deliberations
concerning
ultimate
question
whether
fact
petitioner
constituted
continuing
threat
society
circumstances
believe
refusal
consider
defaulted
claim
federal
habeas
carries
risk
manifest
miscarriage
justice
concur
justice
stevens
suggestion
displace
established
procedural
default
principles
amorphous
fundamental
fairness
inquiry
post
precisely
parts
constitution
fundamental
left
future
elaboration
justice
stevens
defendant
capital
case
raises
substantial
colorable
constitutional
claim
federal
entertain
matter
egregious
violation
state
procedural
rules
regardless
fairness
opportunity
raise
claim
course
trial
appeal
post
reject
suggestion
principles
wainwright
sykes
apply
differently
depending
nature
penalty
state
imposes
violation
criminal
laws
similarly
reject
suggestion
anything
fundamentally
unfair
enforcing
procedural
default
rules
cases
devoid
substantial
claim
alleged
error
undermined
accuracy
guilt
sentencing
determination
view
profound
societal
costs
attend
exercise
habeas
jurisdiction
exercise
carries
serious
burden
justification
friendly
innocence
irrelevant
collateral
attack
criminal
judgments
chi
rev
see
also
engle
isaac
supra
alleged
error
unrelated
innocence
defendant
represented
competent
counsel
full
fair
opportunity
press
claim
state
system
yet
failed
violation
legitimate
rule
procedure
burden
carried
accordingly
affirm
judgment
appeals
upholding
dismissal
petitioner
application
writ
habeas
corpus
affirmed
justice
stevens
justice
marshall
justice
blackmun
join
justice
brennan
joins
parts
ii
iii
dissenting
record
case
unquestionably
demonstrates
petitioner
constitutional
claim
meritorious
significant
risk
put
death
constitutional
rights
violated
take
issue
conclusion
willing
assume
petitioner
fifth
amendment
right
compelled
violated
eighth
amendment
right
fair
constitutionally
sound
sentencing
proceeding
violated
introduction
evidence
fifth
amendment
violation
constitutional
violations
made
difference
life
death
jury
consideration
fate
although
constitutional
violations
issues
sufficiently
serious
decided
grant
certiorari
although
appeals
fourth
circuit
decided
issue
merits
concludes
petitioner
presumably
meritorious
constitutional
claim
procedurally
barred
petitioner
must
therefore
executed
opinion
reach
merits
petitioner
argument
extent
procedural
default
exceedingly
minor
perhaps
kind
harmless
error
petitioner
counsel
raised
timely
objection
introduction
evidence
obtained
violation
fifth
amendment
respected
friend
university
virginia
law
school
assistance
project
brought
issue
attention
virginia
extensive
amicus
curiae
brief
smith
counsel
also
raised
issue
state
federal
habeas
corpus
proceedings
noted
appeals
decided
case
merits
consistent
principle
appellate
arguments
carefully
winnowed
however
smith
counsel
raise
fifth
amendment
issue
original
appeal
virginia
unsurprising
decision
view
fact
governing
virginia
precedent
entirely
valid
two
years
old
decisively
barred
claim
nevertheless
finds
lawyer
decision
include
constitutional
claim
virtually
dispositive
ante
offers
remarkable
explanation
nder
circumstances
petitioner
death
penalty
stand
despite
serious
fifth
eighth
amendment
violations
played
critical
role
determination
death
appropriate
penalty
believe
refusal
consider
defaulted
claim
federal
habeas
carries
risk
manifest
miscarriage
justice
ante
fear
lost
way
procedural
maze
creation
grossly
misevaluated
requirements
law
justice
federal
statutory
mission
federal
habeas
corpus
statute
understand
nature
error
necessary
assess
conclusion
claim
procedurally
defaulted
consider
fifth
amendment
violation
consider
eighth
amendment
violation
begin
common
ground
historic
office
great
writ
ultimate
protection
fundamental
unfairness
well
know
mission
reflected
statutory
requirement
federal
dispose
matter
law
justice
require
equally
clear
application
cause
prejudice
formulation
rigid
bar
review
fundamental
constitutional
violations
support
statute
federal
rule
criminal
procedure
initially
imported
standard
thus
represents
judicial
lawmaking
unabashed
form
nonetheless
reaffirms
today
consistently
held
past
federal
courts
retain
power
entertain
federal
habeas
corpus
requests
despite
absence
cause
prejudice
ante
question
whether
exercise
power
despite
rigor
standard
moreover
continues
commit
maintaining
availability
habeas
corpus
certain
circumstances
even
absence
cause
ibid
indeed
term
emphasized
importance
availability
remanding
case
consider
merits
prisoner
claim
even
though
prisoner
failed
show
cause
default
murray
carrier
ante
concludes
case
miscarriage
justice
result
refusal
entertain
smith
challenge
death
sentence
conclusion
flawed
three
respects
first
mistakenly
assumes
claim
implicating
actual
innocence
rises
level
miscarriage
justice
second
properly
assess
force
claim
death
penalty
invalid
finally
vastly
exaggerates
state
interest
refusing
entertain
claim
accurately
quotes
holding
murray
carrier
constitutional
violation
probably
resulted
conviction
one
actually
innocent
federal
habeas
may
grant
writ
even
absence
showing
cause
procedural
default
ante
seeks
transfer
actual
innocence
standard
capital
sentencing
proceedings
concludes
petitioner
sentencing
hearing
alleged
constitutional
error
neither
precluded
development
true
facts
resulted
admission
false
ones
ante
explain
however
carrier
clearly
correct
holding
propriety
writ
case
innocence
must
also
limiting
principle
federal
ability
exercise
statutory
authority
entertain
federal
habeas
corpus
actions
specifically
explain
principle
apply
constitutional
violation
claimed
resulted
lack
fundamental
fairness
either
conviction
death
sentence
analysis
far
removed
traditional
understanding
habeas
corpus
instance
moore
dempsey
considered
claim
murder
convictions
death
sentences
five
black
defendants
unconstitutional
federal
district
dismissed
writ
habeas
corpus
opinion
justice
holmes
explained
view
allegations
systematic
exclusion
blacks
jury
threatened
mob
violence
federal
district
dismissed
writ
without
considering
factual
allegations
noted
presence
clear
procedural
default
arkansas
refused
entertain
challenge
discrimination
jury
objection
came
late
nevertheless
held
federal
district
entertained
petition
although
allegations
clearly
implicated
questions
accuracy
process
opinion
fairly
read
rest
kind
innocence
inquiry
propounds
today
specifically
rejected
notion
inquiry
presence
serious
constitutional
violation
actually
inquiry
guilt
innocence
petitioners
petitioners
say
victim
must
killed
whites
rather
black
petitioners
leave
one
side
deal
petitioners
innocence
guilt
solely
question
whether
constitutional
rights
preserved
emphasis
added
today
adopts
converse
justice
holmes
proposition
leaves
one
side
question
whether
constitutional
rights
preserved
considers
petitioner
innocence
guilt
majority
reformulation
traditional
understanding
habeas
corpus
appears
premised
notion
constitutional
violations
go
guilt
innocence
sufficiently
serious
implicate
fundamental
fairness
alluded
engle
isaac
accuracy
determination
guilt
innocence
value
criminal
justice
system
analysis
might
great
deal
force
accuracy
value
however
many
constitutional
protections
fifth
amendment
right
compelled
eighth
amendment
right
cruel
unusual
punishment
claims
asserted
petitioner
irrelevant
possibly
counterproductive
constitution
however
decision
adopt
accusatorial
rather
inquisitorial
system
justice
reflect
different
choice
choice
afford
individual
certain
protections
right
compelled
right
cruel
unusual
punishment
among
even
rights
necessarily
implicate
accuracy
proceedings
rather
protections
aspect
fundamental
fairness
liberty
individual
dignity
society
affords
even
charged
heinous
crimes
opinion
exaltation
accuracy
characteristic
fundamental
fairness
deeply
flawed
criminal
justice
system
constitution
protect
values
addition
reliability
guilt
innocence
determination
statutory
duty
serve
law
justice
similarly
reflect
values
thus
begins
conception
fundamental
fairness
far
narrow
conflicts
nature
criminal
justice
system
similarly
fails
give
appropriate
weight
fact
capital
punishment
stake
case
well
settled
death
different
kind
punishment
may
imposed
country
gardner
florida
stevens
vital
importance
defendant
community
decision
impose
death
sentence
appear
consequence
scrupulously
fair
procedures
condemned
prisoner
raises
substantial
colorable
eighth
amendment
violation
special
obligation
consistent
statutory
mission
dispose
matter
law
justice
require
consider
whether
prisoner
claim
render
sentencing
proceeding
fundamentally
unfair
indeed
precisely
concern
prompted
appeals
consider
petitioner
argument
merits
give
weight
consideration
us
matter
life
death
imminent
execution
smith
serves
sufficient
grounds
review
issue
smith
procunier
finally
every
habeas
corpus
decision
magnitude
state
interest
must
considered
case
several
factors
suggest
state
interest
adequate
obstruct
federal
habeas
corpus
consideration
petitioner
claim
first
petitioner
made
timely
objection
trial
state
interest
enforcing
procedural
default
rules
trial
far
greater
state
interest
enforcing
procedural
default
rules
appeal
second
issue
raised
state
amicus
curiae
brief
since
matter
courts
ordinarily
may
exercise
discretion
discretionary
decision
address
issue
hardly
rises
state
interest
sufficient
magnitude
man
die
even
though
fifth
eighth
amendment
rights
violated
achieve
objective
third
issue
presented
state
courts
state
habeas
proceedings
precedent
blocking
petitioner
claim
repudiated
state
habeas
finding
decision
smith
counsel
raise
issue
governing
virginia
precedent
squarely
entirely
reasonable
concluded
fifth
amendment
claim
procedurally
barred
thus
address
fourth
appeals
fourth
circuit
addressed
merits
rest
notion
procedural
default
customarily
defers
federal
courts
appeals
questions
state
law
including
questions
cause
failure
comply
state
procedural
rules
finally
importantly
inadequacy
state
interest
death
penalty
context
decisively
shown
prevailing
practice
many
appellate
courts
special
duty
capital
cases
overlook
procedural
defaults
review
trial
record
reversible
error
affirming
severe
sentences
thus
mistaken
narrow
definition
fundamental
fairness
failure
appreciate
significance
challenge
death
penalty
exaggeration
state
interest
refusing
entertain
claim
raised
trial
appeal
amicus
state
habeas
proceedings
addressed
merits
appeals
briefed
argued
merits
must
assumed
make
difference
life
death
disagree
evaluation
matters
address
merits
petitioner
argument
constitutional
violations
render
sentence
death
fundamentally
unfair
ii
introduction
petitioner
comments
psychiatrist
clearly
violated
fifth
amendment
majority
points
psychiatric
reports
psychiatrists
routinely
forwarded
admissible
virginia
law
ante
however
point
prior
interview
pile
inform
petitioner
statements
might
later
used
right
remain
silent
counsel
present
desired
ante
moreover
psychiatrist
related
petitioner
description
earlier
sexual
assault
letter
prosecution
well
defense
testified
description
state
request
petitioner
capital
sentencing
hearing
state
thus
relied
pile
testimony
evidence
future
dangerousness
one
two
aggravating
circumstances
found
jury
justify
sentence
death
chief
justice
burger
opinion
estelle
smith
makes
absolutely
clear
introduction
evidence
prosecution
sentencing
stage
violated
fifth
amendment
chief
justice
explained
fifth
amendment
fully
applies
capital
sentencing
proceeding
fifth
amendment
prevents
criminal
defendant
made
deluded
instrument
conviction
culombe
connecticut
quoting
hawkins
pleas
crown
ed
protects
well
made
deluded
instrument
execution
chief
justice
also
explained
prosecutorial
use
evidence
psychiatric
interrogation
capital
sentencing
proceeding
requires
protections
warnings
accorded
fifth
amendment
right
contexts
defendant
voluntarily
consent
pretrial
psychiatric
examination
informed
right
remain
silent
possible
use
statements
state
rely
said
psychiatrist
establish
future
dangerousness
thus
use
petitioner
statements
clearly
violated
fifth
amendment
view
majority
willingness
assume
constitutional
violation
present
failure
address
affect
fundamental
fairness
petitioner
sentence
moreover
instructive
recall
importance
fifth
amendment
right
issue
chief
justice
opinion
estelle
smith
provides
guidance
miranda
held
prosecution
may
use
statements
whether
exculpatory
inculpatory
stemming
custodial
interrogation
defendant
unless
demonstrates
use
procedural
safeguards
effective
secure
privilege
purpose
admonitions
combat
saw
inherently
compelling
pressures
work
person
provide
awareness
fifth
amendment
privilege
consequences
forgoing
prerequisite
intelligent
decision
exercise
fifth
amendment
privilege
broad
mischief
seeks
guard
counselman
hitchcock
privilege
fulfilled
criminal
defendant
guaranteed
right
remain
silent
unless
chooses
speak
unfettered
exercise
suffer
penalty
silence
malloy
hogan
iii
also
quite
clear
introduction
evidence
violated
eighth
amendment
right
fair
sentencing
proceeding
respect
disagree
appeals
reading
opinion
authored
zant
stephens
appeals
concluded
jury
also
found
aggravating
circumstance
vileness
death
sentence
stand
even
pile
testimony
represented
flagrant
fifth
amendment
violation
zant
held
georgia
invalidation
one
three
aggravating
circumstances
found
jury
require
death
penalty
set
aside
conclusion
reached
satisfied
evidence
relating
invalid
aggravating
circumstance
properly
admitted
conclude
appeals
seems
assumed
evidence
concerning
invalid
circumstance
simply
irrelevant
valid
circumstances
events
sufficient
support
death
penalty
fact
record
adequately
establishes
one
valid
aggravating
circumstance
may
make
defendant
eligible
death
penalty
justify
conclusion
death
sentence
stand
even
though
highly
prejudicial
inadmissible
evidence
presented
jury
sentencing
hearing
introduction
highly
prejudicial
inadmissible
evidence
evidence
represents
independent
constitutional
violation
quite
clearly
undermines
validity
capital
sentencing
proceeding
violates
eighth
amendment
iv
thus
reach
merits
petitioner
constitutional
claim
also
conclude
merit
question
remains
one
addresses
last
two
paragraphs
opinion
whether
constitutional
error
warrants
conclusion
death
penalty
set
aside
habeas
corpus
proceeding
think
question
answered
reference
language
governing
statute
writ
issue
law
justice
require
hold
today
petitioner
death
sentence
must
stand
despite
fact
blatant
constitutional
violations
presumably
made
difference
jury
recommendation
life
death
violates
law
quite
clearly
justice
well
respectfully
dissent
footnotes
see
gibson
commonwealth
cert
denied
see
shall
dispose
matter
law
justice
require
see
engle
isaac
writ
habeas
corpus
indisputably
holds
honored
position
jurisprudence
today
prior
centuries
writ
bulwark
convictions
violate
fundamental
fairness
see
murray
carrier
ante
stevens
concurring
judgment
indeed
murray
conceded
cause
prejudice
test
may
lack
perfect
historical
pedigree
ante
noted
acknowledged
much
wainwright
sykes
ibid
see
reed
ross
francis
henderson
fay
noia
goes
long
way
toward
eliminating
distinction
procedural
default
cases
request
habeas
relief
ultimate
issue
trial
distinction
long
central
understanding
great
writ
see
ex
parte
bollman
cranch
marshall
demonstrated
bar
question
brought
forward
habeas
corpus
always
distinct
involved
cause
question
whether
individual
shall
imprisoned
always
distinct
question
whether
shall
convicted
acquitted
charge
tried
therefore
questions
separated
may
decided
different
courts
see
supra
expressing
view
william
howard
taft
observed
precisely
central
value
accuracy
guilt
innocence
determinations
fifth
amendment
might
ill
advised
see
taft
administration
criminal
law
yale
examined
original
proposition
prohibition
defendant
criminal
case
shall
compelled
testify
seems
aspects
doubtful
utility
administration
criminal
law
purpose
convicting
guilty
crime
seems
natural
follow
process
methods
obtain
ordinary
life
see
moran
burbine
stevens
dissenting
miller
fenton
malloy
hogan
rogers
richmond
bram
see
also
california
ramos
well
separate
opinions
majority
individual
justices
recognized
qualitative
difference
death
punishments
requires
correspondingly
greater
degree
scrutiny
capital
sentencing
determination
zant
stephens
hereis
qualitative
difference
death
permissible
form
punishment
rummel
estelle
theme
unique
nature
death
penalty
purposes
eighth
amendment
analysis
repeated
time
time
opinions
sentence
death
differs
kind
sentence
imprisonment
lockett
ohio
burger
imposition
death
public
authority
profoundly
different
penalties
cf
meltzer
state
forfeitures
federal
rights
harv
rev
hen
capital
defendant
raises
nonfrivolous
constitutional
question
neither
state
federal
courts
free
refuse
decide
simply
raised
accordance
state
procedural
requirements
rather
federal
law
expressly
provide
matters
procedural
default
matters
death
different
indeed
recognized
even
threat
death
penalty
may
certain
circumstances
exert
special
pull
favor
exercise
federal
undisputed
statutory
power
entertain
habeas
corpus
writ
claim
procedurally
defaulted
fay
noia
willing
excuse
noia
deliberate
decision
appeal
noia
perceived
death
sentence
might
result
grisly
choice
whether
sit
content
life
imprisonment
travel
uncertain
avenue
appeal
successful
might
well
led
retrial
death
sentence
see
also
wainwright
sykes
emphasizing
noia
grisly
choice
acceptance
life
sentence
pursuit
appeal
might
culminate
sentence
death
see
murray
carrier
ante
stevens
concurring
judgment
meltzer
supra
note
procedural
defaults
appellate
stage
federal
habeas
corpus
review
stan
rev
see
brief
assistance
project
university
virginia
law
school
amicus
curiae
pp
arguing
fifth
amendment
required
suppression
psychiatrist
testimony
cf
mapp
ohio
addressing
issue
raised
amicus
schwinden
burlington
northern
mont
determine
follow
usual
rule
issues
raised
amici
part
underlying
action
considered
see
gibson
zahradnick
holding
gibson
commonwealth
analysis
violates
constitution
writ
habeas
corpus
issue
cert
denied
fact
although
appeals
fourth
circuit
decided
gibson
briefs
petitioner
case
filed
gibson
opinion
issued
initial
virginia
opinion
refusing
address
issue
see
state
habeas
opinion
app
oth
gibson
zahradnick
smith
estelle
decided
petitioner
trial
thus
regardless
usefulness
theory
sustain
appeal
neither
fact
available
counsel
needed
light
facts
differences
noted
find
sufficient
reason
counsel
raised
appeal
arguments
presented
thus
conclude
counsel
exercised
reasonable
judgment
deciding
preserve
objection
appeal
state
habeas
order
record
fifth
amendment
issue
waived
forfeited
considered
see
pembaur
cincinnati
regents
university
michigan
ewing
empresa
de
viacao
aerea
rio
grandense
bishop
wood
propper
clark
see
jenkins
anderson
applicability
sykes
prejudice
test
may
turn
interpretation
state
law
resolution
question
aided
significantly
views
federal
courts
may
possess
greater
familiarity
state
law
rummel
estelle
deferring
appeals
interpretation
texas
law
decline
hold
wainwright
bars
rummel
presenting
claim
see
rule
app
proc
cases
death
penalty
imposed
may
notice
plain
error
defect
proceeding
review
whether
brought
attention
trial
take
appropriate
appellate
action
reason
thereof
whenever
error
probably
adversely
affected
substantial
rights
petitioner
arkansas
rev
stat
ann
either
sentence
life
imprisonment
death
present
shall
review
errors
prejudicial
rights
appellant
cave
state
capital
cases
course
continue
review
every
issue
presented
conduct
review
accordance
florida
rule
appellate
procedure
georgia
unified
appeal
rule
iv
capital
cases
shall
review
assertions
error
timely
raised
defendant
proceedings
trial
regardless
whether
assertion
error
presented
trial
motion
new
trial
regardless
whether
error
enumerated
state
osborn
idaho
death
clearly
different
kind
punishment
might
imposed
idaho
code
mandates
examine
sentence
procedure
followed
imposing
sentence
regardless
whether
appeal
even
taken
indicates
us
may
ignore
unchallenged
errors
moreover
gravity
sentence
death
infrequency
imposed
outweighs
rationale
might
proposed
justify
refusal
consider
errors
objected
people
holman
ordinarily
contention
made
trial
waived
appeal
however
qualitative
difference
death
forms
punishment
elected
address
errors
death
penalty
cases
might
affected
decision
sentencing
jury
cert
denied
lowery
state
ind
failure
properly
raise
issues
motion
correct
errors
generally
results
waiver
claimed
errors
since
death
penalty
imposed
case
however
review
state
record
concerning
questions
ice
commonwealth
death
penalty
case
every
prejudicial
error
must
considered
whether
objection
made
trial
cert
denied
state
hamilton
la
death
penalty
cases
reviewed
assignments
error
despite
absence
contemporaneous
objection
order
determine
whether
error
render
ed
result
unreliable
thus
avoiding
later
consideration
error
context
ineffective
assistance
counsel
state
nave
mo
several
hold
general
rule
allegations
error
assigned
motion
new
trial
preserved
appellate
review
codified
missouri
rule
exceptions
applicable
inapplicable
death
penalty
cases
even
though
assignment
error
improperly
preserved
review
ex
gratia
point
relied
plain
error
determine
manifest
injustice
miscarriage
justice
resulted
denial
nave
request
continuance
commonwealth
mckenna
imposition
death
penalty
irrevocable
finality
imperative
standards
sentence
fixed
constitutionally
beyond
reproach
waiver
rule
exalted
position
lofty
require
blind
real
issue
propriety
allowing
state
conduct
illegal
execution
state
patterson
appeal
murder
conviction
death
penalty
imposed
reviews
entire
record
prejudicial
error
favorem
vitae
regardless
whether
error
properly
preserved
review
state
brown
utah
objection
made
omission
nevertheless
capital
case
consider
defendant
contention
appeal
indeed
virginia
law
recognizes
special
obligations
attendant
reviewing
death
penalties
providing
automatic
virginia
review
death
penalty
code
giving
capital
cases
priority
docket
state
courts
interpret
statutes
impose
obligation
review
transcript
possible
errors
see
state
osborn
supra
see
prosecutor
closing
argument
sentencing
phase
app
said
instructed
may
fix
punishment
death
commonwealth
proved
case
proved
prior
history
commit
criminal
acts
violence
constitute
continuous
serious
threat
society
commonwealth
proved
commonwealth
proved
prior
crime
convicted
yesterday
assaulted
person
bus
said
tore
clothes
decided
state
trial
rejection
petitioner
trial
objection
psychiatrist
testimony
stands
sharp
contrast
chief
justice
estelle
analysis
believe
doctor
pile
duty
inform
anything
may
say
may
used
law
police
officer
miranda
app
state
argues
petitioner
case
distinguishable
estelle
defense
requested
psychiatric
examination
view
fact
pile
related
account
prosecution
testified
prosecution
quite
clearly
agent
state
sense
psychiatrist
estelle
agent
state
see
grigson
went
beyond
simply
reporting
issue
competence
testified
prosecution
penalty
phase
crucial
issue
respondent
future
dangerousness
role
changed
became
essentially
like
agent
state
recounting
unwarned
statements
made
postarrest
custodial
setting
petitioner
amici
turn
argue
examination
assist
defense
absolute
guarantee
confidentiality
rather
miranda
warnings
required
contend
confidentiality
especially
important
effectuate
due
process
right
consult
psychiatrist
recognized
ake
oklahoma
since
minimum
estelle
required
pile
give
miranda
warnings
need
consider
possibility
disclosure
inappropriate
circumstances
least
clear
circumstances
testimony
violated
petitioner
fifth
amendment
right
moreover
need
decide
whether
circumstances
psychiatrist
may
actually
acting
agent
defense
transformation
agent
state
constitutionally
invalid
sixth
amendment
invalid
aggravating
circumstance
found
jury
case
struck
arnold
georgia
concluded
fails
provide
adequate
basis
distinguishing
murder
case
death
penalty
may
imposed
cases
penalty
may
imposed
see
nn
supra
underlying
evidence
nevertheless
fully
admissible
sentencing
phase
thus
evidence
jury
might
relied
case
find
respondent
previously
convicted
substantial
number
serious
assaultive
offenses
concedes
properly
adduced
sentencing
hearing
fully
subject
explanation
defendant
emphasis
added
continued
decision
case
depends
part
existence
important
procedural
safeguard
mandatory
appellate
review
death
sentence
georgia
avoid
arbitrariness
assure
proportionality
accept
view
subsequent
invalidation
one
several
statutory
aggravating
circumstances
automatically
require
reversal
death
penalty
assured
death
sentence
set
aside
invalidation
aggravating
circumstance
makes
penalty
arbitrary
capricious
georgia
response
certified
question
expressly
stated
different
result
might
reached
case
evidence
submitted
support
statutory
aggravating
circumstance
otherwise
admissible
thereafter
circumstance
failed
ibid
emphasis
added