Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/558bv.pdf
Page Number: 304

Cite as: 558 U. S. 139 (2010) 

143 

Opinion of the Court 

opinion.  Spisak  v.  Hudson,  512  F.  3d  852,  853–854  (2008). 
The  State  again  sought  certiorari.  We  again  granted  the 
petition.  And we now reverse. 

II 

Spisak’s  ﬁrst  claim  concerns  the  instructions  and  verdict 
forms  that  the  jury  received  at  the  sentencing  phase  of  his 
trial.  The  Court  of  Appeals  held  the  sentencing  instruc­
tions  unconstitutional  because,  in  its  view,  the  instructions, 
taken together with the forms, “require[d]” juror “unanimity 
as  to  the  presence  of  a  mitigating  factor”—contrary  to  this 
Court’s  holding  in  Mills  v.  Maryland,  supra.  465  F.  3d,  at 
708.  Since  the  parties  do  not  dispute  that  the  Ohio  courts 
“adjudicated” this claim, i. e., they considered and rejected it 
“on  the  merits,”  the  law  permits  a  federal  court  to  reach  a 
contrary  decision  only  if  the  state-court  decision  “was  con­
trary  to,  or  involved  an  unreasonable  application  of,  clearly 
established  Federal  law,  as  determined  by  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States.”  28  U. S. C.  § 2254(d)(1).  Un­
like  the  Court  of  Appeals,  we  conclude  that  Spisak’s  claim 
does not satisfy this standard. 

The  parties, like  the Court  of Appeals,  assume that  Mills 
sets  forth  the  pertinent  “clearly  established  Federal  law.” 
While recognizing some uncertainty as to whether Mills was 
“clearly  established Federal  law”  for  the purpose  of  review­
ing  the  Ohio  Supreme  Court’s  opinion,  we  shall  assume  the 
same.  Compare  Williams  v.  Taylor,  529  U. S.  362,  390 
(2000)  (Stevens,  J.,  for  the  Court)  (applicable  date  for  pur­
poses of determining whether “Federal law” is “established” 
is  when  the  “state-court  conviction  became  ﬁnal”),  with  id., 
at  412  (O’Connor,  J.,  for  the  Court)  (applicable  date  is  “the 
time  of  the  relevant  state-court  decision”);  see  State  v. 
Spisak, 36 Ohio St. 3d 80, 521 N. E. 2d 800 (decided Apr. 13, 
1988),  cert.  denied,  489  U. S.  1071  (decided  Mar.  6,  1989); 
Mills v.  Maryland, supra (decided June 6, 1988).