« Notable Sixth Circuit habeas ruling on sentencing due process | Main | ABA releases another mondo state death penalty report »

October 9, 2007

SCOTUS capital sentencing dogs not barking with today's order list

Lyle Denniston at SCOTUSblog here details that the Supreme Court did not grant any new cases today, and his report includes this coverage of some notable actions in capital cases:

The Court ... refused to give states new guidance on how a death-row inmate is to be judged mentally retarded and thus not subject to the death penalty. (Chester v. Texas, 06-1616)....

Over the dissents of three Justices, the Court sent back to lower courts for reconsideration a new case testing what instructions must be given to a jury in a death penalty case to assure that they need not be unanimous in finding offsetting (mitigating) factors even though they must all agree on their ultimate punishment verdict.  The case, Hudson v. Spisak (06-1535), also tested the standard for evaluating the effectiveness of a defense lawyer when trial strategy seems to work against the defendant’s interests.  The case was returned to the Sixth Circuit Court for a new look under two prior precedents, Carey v. Musladin and Schriro v. Landrigan.  Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and John Paul Stevens noted that they would have denied the petition.

The Court took no action on Tuesday on a plea to expand its review of the lethal injection procedure in capital punishment cases. The new case is Taylor v. Crawford (07-303). The Court was asked to expedite that petition and hear it along with 07-5439, granted in September.

UPDATE:  For more on these SCOTUS (non)developments, check out posts at Crime & Consequences and Capital Defense Weekly.

October 9, 2007 at 11:07 AM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e200e54f083bb68834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference SCOTUS capital sentencing dogs not barking with today's order list:

Comments

Lyle has now corrected his post to say, "Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and John Paul Stevens noted that they would have denied the petition."

Links to pertinent opinions, petitions, etc. are available here.

Posted by: Kent Scheidegger | Oct 9, 2007 1:02:34 PM

Thanks, Kent. Fixed here, too, now.

Posted by: Doug B. | Oct 9, 2007 2:16:41 PM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB