Opinion ID: 776528
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: the prosecutor's penalty phase argument was improper;

Text: 28 II. trial counsel did not render effective assistance because he failed to investigate and present mitigating evidence and presented a harmful closing argument; 29 III. Whitney's statement was improperly admitted at trial because his alleged mental impairments rendered him unable to make a knowing and intelligent waiver of his Miranda rights; 30 IV. the trial court failed to properly instruct the jury on the nature and use of aggravating and mitigating circumstances in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments; 31 V. the Commonwealth used peremptory challenges to exclude African American potential jurors in violation of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986) and Swain v. Alabama, 380 U.S. 202, 85 S.Ct. 824, 13 L.Ed.2d 759 (1965); 32 VI. the trial court gave an inaccurate and misleading voluntary intoxication instruction, trial counsel ineffectively failed to object and to present all of the available evidence of petitioner's intoxication, and the Commonwealth presented insufficient evidence of petitioner's capacity to form the specific intent required for first degree murder; 33 VII. the trial court erred in failing to give a life without possibility of parole instruction to the jury; 34 VIII. the sentencing phase jury instructions indicated that mitigating circumstances had to be found unanimously, in violation of Mills v. Maryland, 486 U.S. 367, 108 S.Ct. 1860, 100 L.Ed.2d 384 (1988); 35