Case ID: f2d_882/html/0141-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Johnny Paul PENRY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. James A. LYNAUGH, Interim Director, Texas Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 87-2466.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Aug. 15, 1989.
    Curtis C. Mason, Staff Counsel for Inmates, Texas Dept, of Corr., Huntsville, Tex., for petitioner-appellant.
    Paula C. Offenhauser, Asst. Atty. Gen., Austin, Tex., for respondent-appellee.
    
      
       Acting as a panel quorum as in original decision at 832 F.2d 915.
    
   ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before REAVLEY and GARWOOD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The Supreme Court has concluded that the jury was not provided with a vehicle for responding to the mitigating evidence of Penry’s mental retardation and abused background, and the Court has ordered that Penry be resentenced. Penry v. Lynaugh, — U.S.-, 109 S.Ct. 2934, 106 L.Ed.2d 256 (1989).

Accordingly, the district court’s judgment denying the writ is reversed, and the cause is remanded to that court for an order complying with the directions of the Supreme Court.