Document: 112 S.Ct. 2222 504 U.S. 719 119 L.Ed.2d 492 Derrick MORGAN, Petitionerv.ILLINOIS. No. 91-5118. Argued Jan. 21, 1992. Decided June 15, Syllabus The trial of a capital offense in Illinois is conducted two phases, with the same jury determining both defendant's guilt and whether death penalty should be imposed. In accordance state law, court voir dire to select for petitioner Morgan's murder trial. State requested, pursuant Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 510, 88 1770, 20 776 that ask jurors they would automatically vote against no matter what facts case were. However, refused request if any impose regardless facts, stating it had asked substantially question. fact, every empaneled juror was generally each could fair impartial, most were follow "instructions on law." Morgan convicted sentenced death. Supreme Court affirmed, ruling not required include "life qualifying" or "reverse-Witherspoon" question upon request. Held: court's refusal inquire potential convicting inconsistent Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment. Pp. 725-739. (a) process demands provided defendant at sentencing phase must stand impartial indifferent extent commanded by Sixth See, e.g., id., 518, S.Ct., 1775. 726-728. (b) Based this impartiality requirement, may challenge cause prospective who will penalty. Such fail good faith consider evidence aggravating mitigating circumstances as instructions require. Cf., Wainwright Witt, 469 412, 424, 105 844, 852, 83 841. P. 728-729. (c) On must, request, into jurors' views punishment. Part guaranty right an adequate identify unqualified jurors. exercise intelligently his unwaveringly after finding unless he given opportunity such persons questioning them about their Cf. Lockhart McCree, 476 162, 170, n. 7, 106 1758, 1763, 90 137. Absent opportunity, tried those always rendered nugatory meaningless State's right, absence questioning, strike never do so. 729-734. (d) insufficient satisfy make inquiry. own under Witt belies its argument general fairness "follow law" questions enough detect venire all truth candor respond affirmatively types questions, personally confident dogmatic are while leaving specific concern unprobed. More importantly, belief imposed ipso facto conviction reflects directly individual's inability law. 734-736. (e) A whom irrelevant plainly saying worth consideration, view which has long been rejected finds basis statutory decisional Here, instruction accords statute, requires instructed relevant factors, lists certain directs factors "sufficient preclude" penalty's imposition. Since statute indicates lesser sentence available where exists, invariably give consideration contemplates. 736-739. 142 Ill.2d 410, 154 Ill.Dec. 534, 568 N.E.2d 755, reversed remanded. WHITE, J., delivered opinion Court, BLACKMUN, STEVENS, O'CONNOR, KENNEDY, SOUTER, JJ., joined. SCALIA, filed dissenting opinion, REHNQUIST, C.J., THOMAS, Allen H. Andrews, III, Springfield, Ill., petitioner. Kenneth L. Gillis, Chicago, respondent. Justice WHITE Court. 1 We decide here whether, during offense, may, consistent Amendment, refuse inquiry defendant. 2 * phases. first first-degree murder, defined Ill.Rev.Stat., ch. 38, ¶ 9-1(a) (Supp.1990). law uses decided determine shall imposed,1 conviction, separate hearing commences existence factors. 9-1(d)(1). To eligible penalty, find unanimously, 9-1(g), beyond reasonable doubt, 9-1(f), least 18 years old time 10 enumerated exists. 9-1(b). 9-1(b)(5) (murder hire contract); 9-1(b)(10) (premeditated preconceived plan). If none exist, term imprisonment. 9-1(g). "If there unanimous one more set forth subsection imposed." Ibid. As part balance, existing case, five enumerated, but exclusive. 9-1(c). also present statute. determines unanimously sufficient preclude imposition sentence, death." 3 Petitioner Cook County, amply proved hired kill narcotics dealer apparently competing El Rukns, Chicago's violent inner-city gangs. For $4,000, lured dealer, friend, abandoned apartment shot him head six times. Upon aggravation mitigation, 4 Three venires called before finally chosen. court, rather than attorneys, dire. People Gacy, 103 1, 36-37, 82 391, 404-405, 468 1171, 1184-1185 (1984). State, having elected pursue punishment, requested permitted (1968), instances offense. Accordingly, over opposition from defense, questioned member moral religious principles so strong she "regardless facts." App. 9, 78, 90. Seventeen excused when expressed substantial doubts ability deciding Id., 9-22, 79-83, 90-94. All eventually individually Witherspoon, receiving responding negative slight variation: "Would you were?" 33; see 36, 41, 48, 55, 59, 64, 69, 76, 88, 97, 103. 5 After seven members questioned, including three became jurors, petitioner's counsel following question: found guilty, are?" 44. "asked different vein nature." 6 Prior venires, explained terms dictates procedure trials, outlined above. See 24, 77-78, During dire, received 9 12 affirmative response variations my even though agree?" 30; 43, 49, 56, 60, 107. did way. 73-77, 83-89, 94-100. Every impartial.2 Each responded appropriately these (1) "Do know reason why cannot impartial?" 68, 75, 99; (2) feel can sides trial?" 70; 35, 61, 65, 77, 100, 110. When empaneled, further swore oath "well truly try issues joined herein true deliverance between bar verdict render according evidence." Tr. 601-602; 264, 370, 429, 507, 544, 575-576. 7 appeal, affirmed rejecting claim that, Ross Oklahoma, 487 81, 108 2273, 101 80 (1988), concluded nothing exclude 470, 557, 778 (1991).3 That violation Ross, concluding instead "was selected cross-section community, uphold her personal feelings, call question." 8 granted certiorari because considerable disagreement among courts last resort issue case.4 502 ----, 295, 116 239 (1991). now reverse judgment II have emphasized previously "any way up scheme," Spaziano Florida, 447, 464, 104 3154, 3164, 340 (1984) (citations omitted), constitutionally Amendment otherwise provide determination chosen, however, delegate task trials addition duty innocence underlying crime. issue, therefore, entitled relief conclude is, course doing we deal four issues: impartial; removed ground bias irrespective law; punishment; sufficient. A. Duncan Louisiana, 145, 1444, 491 held guaranteed criminal cases which, federal come within Amendment's guarantee jury. decision applying provision States, recognized Irvin Dowd, 366 717, 81 1639, 751 (1961), Turner 379 466, 85 546, 13 424 (1965), itself independently cause: 11 "Although said does demand use procedure, Fay New York, 332 261 [67 1613, 91 L.Ed. 2043] [1947]; Palko Connecticut, 302 319 [58 149, 288] [1937], Columbia University Legislative Drafting Research Fund, Index Digest Constitutions, 578-579 (1959). essence, guarantees criminally accused panel 'indifferent' failure accord violates minimal standards due process. re Oliver, 333 257 [68 499, 92 682] [1948]; Tumey Ohio, 273 510 [47 437, 71 749] [1927]. 'A tribunal basic requirement process.' Murchison, 349 133, 136 [75 623, 99 942] [1955]. ultimate analysis, only strip man liberty life. language Lord Coke, 'indifferent stands unsworne.' Co. Litt. 155b. His based developed Thompson City Louisville, 362 199 [80 624, 654] [1960]. This true, heinousness crime charged, apparent offender station life occupies. It written our early 1807 Chief Marshall Burr's Trial 416 (1807). 'The theory formed impartial.' Reynolds United 98 155 [25 244] [1879]." supra, U.S., 721-722, 1641-1642 (footnote omitted). relied passage delineate "the nature commands purported accord." 471, 549. short, reflected above, alone demanded defendant, it, 472, 10, 549 10; cf. Groppi Wisconsin, 400 505, 508-511, 490, 492-494, 27 571 (1971). Thus decisions dealing juries presenting analogous today, 1774-1775; Adams Texas, 448 40, 100 2521, 2524, 65 581 (1980); 423, 851-852, 841 (1985); 85, 2276-2277, strictures dictated Amendments ensure undertake sentencing. Murray, 28, 1683, 1688, (1986) (WHITE, plurality opinion). B 14 proper standard punishment . juror's 'prevent impair performance duties oath.' " 852 (quoting 45, 2526, (1980)). Under standard, clear Adams, progeny instructions, cause. 15 Thereafter, remove declared guilty. juror, peremptory challenge, affirmed. But reaching result, announced considered Constitution jury, constitutional error enunciated Witt. "[h]ad [this juror] sat ultimately death, properly preserved [the cause, overturned." 2277 (citing supra ). 16 reiterate today. require do. Indeed, already merits, presence either entirely juror. Therefore, embodied maintains views. imposed, disentitled execute sentence. C 17 raises foregoing precepts, argues discretion, direct matter, other purports assure able "[v ]oir 'is supervision great necessity, left sound discretion.' Ristaino 589, 594, 96 1017, 1020, 47 258 (1976) Connors 158 408, 413, 951, 953, 39 1033 (1895). Constitution, all, dictate catechism afforded Even so, Dennis 339 171-172, 70 519, 523-524, 94 734 (1950); Morford 258, 259, 586, 587, 815 (1950). "Voir plays critical function assuring [constitutional] honored. Without judge's responsibility impartially evaluate fulfilled." Rosales-Lopez 451 182, 188, 1629, 1634, 68 22 (1981) Hence, "[t]he court's] restriction inquiries counsel, [are] subject essential fairness." Aldridge 283 308, 310, 51 471-472, 75 1054 (1931).5 adequacy easily appellate review, Rosales-Lopez, hesitated, particularly cases, made effectuate protections. 1688-1689; Ham South Carolina, 409 524, 526-527, 93 848, 850-851, 35 46 (1973). Our holding Ham, instance, follows: 19 "Since purposes insure 'essential fairness,' Lisenba California, 314 219, 236, 62 280, 289-290, 86 166 (1941), since principal purpose adoption prohibit States invidiously discriminating race, Slaughter-House Cases, Wall. 21 394 (1873), think judge interrogate racial prejudice. Carolina permits challenges authorizes conduct examination created framework selection juries, shown record interrogated bias." 850. recognize propounded here, disqualify sitting.6 At inception, conferred "right" reality limitation making unlimited "might hesitate" return imposing 512-513, 1772; 47-49, 2527-2528. drawn struck expressing qualms "self-evident role arbiter fell woefully short Amendments." 1774-1775. preserve impartiality, constrained "[A] entrust live die organized Specifically, hold carried out recommended chosen excluding veniremen simply voiced objections conscientious scruples infliction. No put hands selected." 520-523, 1776-1778 (footnotes omitted); 179-180, 1768-1769, 137 (1986). limited power broadly hesitant fact excluded unmistakably without regard might them. ." 522, 1777, (emphasis original); 513-514, 1772-1773. 23 (1985), revisited footnote 'class' whose prevent oaths." 5, 5; Lockett 438 595-596, 2954, 2959-2960, 57 973 (1978). McCree thereafter spoke 'Witherspoon -excludables' removal "serves interest obtaining single [a capital] case." 180, 1768. From moreover, very step observe well Lockhart: 24 "[T]he innocence. Ipso facto, penalty." 7. 25 expanded briefly Witt: "As situation adversary wishes bias, then, seeking exclusion demonstrate, through lacks impartiality. then proper." (citation omitted; emphasis added). 26 complementary biased guilt. Were lay bare foundation so.7 D remaining noted suggests like employed penalty.8 argument. succeeding large measure superfluous convinced preventing impairing oath. jurors—whether unalterably favor opposed case—by definition ones perform protestations contrary notwithstanding. 28 affirmatively, 729. Any Turner, 34-35, 1687-1688 could, conscience, swear yet unaware maintaining beliefs so.9 ascertain misconception. risk "infected [is] unacceptable light ease minimized." 1688 entitled, discerning who, prior case-in-chief, predetermined terminating trial, being III 29 dissent, insists announce guilty so-called nonstatutory, be. Post, 742-746. obviously deem penalty: weight it. While SCALIA's jaundiced today best rejection line tracing Woodson North 428 2978, 49 944 (1976), (1978), developing offenses, Walton Arizona, 497 639, 669-673, 110 3047, 111 511 (1990) (SCALIA, concurring judgment); Payne Tennessee, 501 2597, 2613, 115 720 (1991) concurring); Sochor --- 2114, ---- part), important support requirements concerning described Court's cases. 30 provides consider, instruct penalty," 9-1(c) (Supp.1990), legislature deemed Ibid.10 explicitly controlling deliberation: 31 [enumerated aggravation] 32 jury: 33 "In Defendant supported evidence. 34 find, your evidence, sign requiring 122-123. 36 states announcing intention reading instruction, renders "sufficient" meaningless. exists; thus reached SCALIA chooses argue "merciless juror" "lawless" one, post, 751, error, recognizes manner requests helpful means protecting 3, supra. suggested 37 Surely particular judge, imposes waive her, beside point intends refusing advance direction himself herself. likewise disqualified merits proposed judge. IV 38 Because "inadequacy leads us doubt compliance stand.11 37, 1688-1689. affirming reversed, remanded proceedings opinion. So ordered. 40 THE CHIEF JUSTICE THOMAS join, dissenting. 41 holds "impartial" sense Amendment; directed "bias" request; "fairness" inadequate. conclusions seem me jointly severally wrong, I dissent. 42 reaffirms oft-repeated (which binding Amendment) case. Ante, 726. Clemons Mississippi, 494 738, 745-746, 1441, 725 (1990); 647-649, Cabana Bullock, 474 376, 385 (1986); (1984); McMillan Pennsylvania, 477 79, 93, 2411, 2419-2420, 67 (no noncapital case). merely "express serious reservations punishment" "impartial jury" 1774-1775, (1968); (1985). propositions are, course, contradictory: guarantee, neither subsidiary requisite impartial. 43 effectively concedes apply relying says 727. agree that. Gardner 430 349, 358, 97 1197, 1204-1205, 393 (1977) (plurality) (sentencing procedures comply Clause). agree, unconstitutional "partiality," purposes, established judgment—which applies others—happens favorable defense. Assume, example, prosecution plans prove elements circumstantial x, y, z. establish partiality (and hence obtain mandatory recusal) getting state, if, crime, z shown, convict. admission demonstrate regarding how deserves weighed—and application will, certainty, convict hand, therefore "biased" "partial" forbidden sense. also, seems me, appropriateness thinks whenever him. sure, governing verdicts less circumstances, just as, hypothetical propounded, acquit despite proof defense-favorable option convert amenable entertaining option. 44 allowing seating judge-imposed permitting people elect (or executive appoint) judges Grinnell Corp., 384 563, 583, 1698, 1710, (1966); Richards, 737 F.2d 1307, 1311 (CA4 1984), cert. denied, 1106, 779, 774 Thompson, 483 527, 530-531 (CA3 1973) (Adams, dissenting); W. LaFave & J. Israel, Criminal Procedure § 21.4(b), p. 747 (adherence legal principle challenging judge). precisely individual "biases" permissible skew makeup whole death-scrupled 519-523, 1775-1778. 45 view, factors1 "will do." 729 added); ante, 738-739. "mitigating" weigh hypothesis, firm attachment decisionmaker "conscientiously [to] 851-852; 178, 1767-1768, 2526. applied Remarkably, rests bothering describe key instructions. considers them, perfectly taking warranted. "[a]ggravating reasons death"; "[m]itigating "consider evidence"; found, "from [its] sentence," 122-123.2 define constitutes "aggravating" factor, jury's finding, death-eligibility stage, committed contract killing necessarily aggravator. item mitigating, "reaso[n] Thus, precluded bright-line position valid "fail evidence," 2229; (Supp.1990) ("The ."); fails effect desires.3 Nor death-inclined justified that—regardless permit—the Eighth prohibits advocating weighing stage. area hold, sentencer ) offered "not considering" 604, 2964-2965, (1978) Bell 637, 642, 2977, 2980-2981, 1010 (same). Walton, 652, (" '[T]he individualized satisfied evidence' ") added) Blystone 299, 307, 1078, 1083, 255 (1990)); Saffle Parks, 484, 490 ("the evidence") McKoy 433, 442-443, 1227, 1233-1234, 369 ("each [must] Penry Lynaugh, 302, 318, 109 2934, 2946-2947, 256 (1989) (a "prevent considering giving [mitigating] 328, 2951-2952 (jury "provided vehicle 'reasoned response' rendering decision") Mills Maryland, 486 367, 375, 1860, 1865-1866, (1988) (State "barrier sentencer's 34, 1687, (sentencer "must free Roberts 431 633, 1993, 1995-1996, 52 637 (mandatory "does allow particularized factors") 303, 2990-2991, (same); Jurek 262, 271, 2950, 2956, 929 ("A allowed Similarly, final held, not, grounds, Hitchcock Dugger, 481 393, 394, 398-399, 107 1821, 1824-1825, 95 347 (1987); Eddings 455 104, 113-114, 102 869, 876-877, (1982) "refuse original). meant "link contemporary community values penal system," 1775 15; mean specify content be.4 "conscience community," 1775, includes swayed 48 relies dicta contained (1988). challenged stated convicted. used Although assumed 84-85, 2276-2277 717 P.2d 117, 120 (Okla.Crim.App.1986)), deprived actually petit partial. 86-88, 2277-2278. conclusion, served, 2277. attaches dictum, describes "announc[ing] view," 728. hyperbole. face dictum unwilling phase—a purport examine independently. 2276-2277. quite modest proposition violate entitle 50 agreed advocate conclusion Mu'Min Virginia, 500 1899, 114 493 (1991), surveyed except interracial crimes "retai[n] latitude dire." 1904; (1976). authority narrow respect state-court supervisory "limited enforcing Constitution," Mu'Min, 1903. concluded, "fundamentally unfair," 1905. absent some "special circumstance," 1689, "generalized thorough veniremen" Ristaino, 598, 1022. Finally, acknowledged credibility determinations involved, "be overturned 'manifest error,' Patton Yount, 467 1025, 1031, 2885, 2888-2889, 847 723, 1642-1643, (1961)); ----. extending Witherspoon's jury-balancing rule contain mix constitute circumstance" necessitating sought, decree. Its theory, described, do," assuming (contrary reality) fits (i.e., open voting allegedly circumstances), defy element identified willingness specifically nine served disagreed answered affirmatively. Moreover, informed selected, instructions; subsequently, twelve negatively These extensive succeeded identifying unable phase: admitted anger felt friend's parents, sentiments believe hearing. Taking appropriate account demeanor veniremen, manifestly erroneous. 53 asked, passes gullible scrutiny. First, "such 735. words, violating realizing doing. obvious solution problem achieved changing well-intentioned understand aggravators-always-outweigh-mitigators prohibited. reflect objection clarity regard. 54 Second, asserts belied Witt." 734. told, "Witherspoon superfluous," reasoning assumes, ("it peradventure juror," 47-48, 2527) impossible anything say "superfluous." What describes, 733, "very step" leap unbridgeable chasm logic. prevented death; concludes compelled would, establishing aggravated false premise.5 event, mere sees fit another order discover one-result-only cannot, logical inadequate job. 55 similar reasons, reject unfair" discovering excluding) Brief Wardius Oregon, 412 2208, (1973)). unfair, option, today's provide, abandoning Witherspoon-qualification. (Where death-penalty unanimity am prosecutors prefer wholesale elimination favoring consequence decision.) unfairness asymmetry. By Illinois' 9-1(g) practical consequences serve vastly different: opponent block unwavering advocates And fundamentally, asymmetry unfair because, Witherspoon-disqualified lawless whereas new not. stage two-part hearing, determine, specified second, aggravators "no imposition." mandatory, mitigation optional; defined, Given (the classic partiality)—since show mitigation. promising lawless, "sufficiently mitigating." decided, punished extend mercy. scheme complies (ever-expanding) jurisprudence existed yesterday. has, effect, added merciless sit. 56 Sixteen ago, decreed—by sheer act pretense text American tradition—that (as We, People) decree absolutely categorically, act, (presumably) genocide; Woodson, 303-305, 2990-2992. Today, obscured fog confusion annually improvised Eighth-Amendment, "death-is-different" jurisprudence, strikes blow campaign Not mercy allowed, merciful sit judgment. Those author Exodus, Immanuel Kant,6 banished juries—not decreed, share penological preferences States; grossly offends 9-1(d)(3) guide 9-1(h), identical led exchange: "Q Would agree? "A Yes. Do trial? came—I parents murdered ago want hung. You couldn't throughout proceedings? excused." 72-73. subsequently "to imply 'reverse-Witherspoon' inappropriate. type scrutiny receive go afford possible safeguard. ensuring certainly direct. ask." Jackson, 145 110, 163 859, 890, 582 125, 156 Atkins, 303 S.C. 214, 222-223, 399 S.E.2d 760, 765 (1990). Delaware unnecessary oath, swears Riley 585 A.2d 719, 725-726 (Del.1990), 2840, 1008 (1991); Hyman, 276 559, 281 209, 211-212 (1981), 458 1122, 3510, 73 1384 (1982). Missouri appears well. McMillin, 783 S.W.2d 82, (Mo.), 498 225, 179 Georgia, Jersey, Utah, Virginia disagree, Bittaker, Cal.3d 1046, 1083-1084, 259 Cal.Rptr. 630, 650, 659, 679 (1989); Skipper Ga. 802, 806-807, 364 835, 839 (1988); Henry, 196 La. 217, 232-234, 198 So. 910, 914-916 (1940); Williams, 113 N.J. 415-417, 550 1172, 1182-1184 Rogers, 316 N.C. 203, 216-218, 341 713, 722 Norton, 675 577, 588-589 (Utah 1983), 466 942, 1923, 470 Patterson Commonwealth, 222 Va. 653, 657-660, 212, 214-216 Arkansas, Kentucky. Pickens 292 Ark. 362, 366-367, 730 230, 233-234, 484 917, 269, 226 Gore 475 So.2d 1205, 1206-1208 (Fla.1985), 1240, 89 348 Morris 766 58, 60 (Ky.1989). Lower Alabama latter view. Bracewell 506 354, 358 (Ala.Crim.App.1986); Henderson 583 276, 283-284 (Ala.Crim.App.1990) "plain error" sua sponte qualify" jurors), aff'd, 305 1905, (1991): "To helpful. Rather, fundamentally unfair." changed structure Furman 408 238, 2726, 346 (1972), longer area. arguments raised rejected. 45-47, 2526-2528, (1980). Texas stated: "[J]urors presented convinces affirmative. appearing proceedings. Jurors characteristically answers result automatic informed. 'on imposed.' 271 [96 929] (opinion Stewart, Powell, JJ.). exact science, bifurcated unavoidably range discretion 46, 2527 balancing approach vests considerably and, stronger reason, apply. 1687-1688, Fifth Circuit observed obiter dictum: "All potentially biased. designed cull side Clearly, extremes eliminated—i.e., spite sentence." Smith Balkcom, 660 573, 578 modified, 671 858, 459 882, 181, 74 148 Almost passing inapposite putative "quantitative difference." nullify "Persons carry weight," argues, "because still need persuade eleven Respondent 27. dissent champion argument, 750, although clearly foreclosed too many. taken reference each, fate, equally maintain beliefs—that offense—has demonstrated, 2, exchange, highlighting inconsistency regards Witherspoon: "THE COURT: Wait minute, ma'am. haven't mind yet. Just seat. Let things. prefixed ideas all? "[A]: all. Will you? concerned indicated State. bring back Step down." 432, 12, 856, 12. provides: "Mitigating following: "(1) significant history activity; "(2) influence extreme mental emotional disturbance, defense prosecution; "(3) participant homicidal consented act; "(4) acted compulsion threat menace imminent infliction bodily harm; "(5) commission acts causing bearing validity conviction. 523, 21. bear ignore factor here. contend seeks necessary strictly factual determination, statutorily exists (in killing). Obviously, obey disclose difficulty. Petitioner's theory—which accepts, 735—736 special 8. implicitly (how else, mitigation?) 738. inference fallacious: person something logically circumstance "reason," "sufficient." notes [them] relevant" 737. listed "relevant" "may" 9-1(c), introduce statute's permissive nonexhaustive list needs show, viz., factors) "mitigating." obligation distinguish believes "extreme disturbance," 9-1(c)(2)—is mitigating. (Presumably, "bad childhood" excluded.) vacate impartiality—i.e., instructions—we guided, (perhaps) review), given. suggestion somehow Woodson-Lockett 736. quotations dozen painfully clear. If, claims, involved reverse" 731, difficult "automatically" sufficiently faithful service "substantially impaired"—the reformulated adopted premise awareness wrong. Exodus 21:12 ("He smiteth man, die, surely death"); I. Kant, Philosophy Law [1796] (W. Hastie transl. 1887) ("[W]hoever Murder, die. Civil Society resolved dissolve consent members[,] Murderer lying prison ought executed resolution out. done realize desert deeds .").

Category: 0