Document: 498 U.S. 308 111 S.Ct. 731 112 L.Ed.2d 812 Robert Lacy PARKER, Petitioner,v.Richard L. DUGGER, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al. No. 89-5961. Argued Nov. 7, 1990. Decided Jan. 22, 1991. Rehearing Denied March 18, See 499 932, 1340. Syllabus A jury convicted petitioner Parker first-degree murder for the killings Richard Padgett and Nancy Sheppard. At advisory sentencing hearing, found that sufficient aggravating circumstances existed to justify a death sentence as both murders, but mitigating outweigh those factors, therefore recommended be sentenced life imprisonment on counts. The trial judge, who has ultimate authority under state law, accepted jury's recommendation murder, overrode Sheppard death. judge explained, inter alia, he had found, based review evidence, six statutory no circumstances. He did not discuss evidence of, or reach any explicit conclusions concerning, nonstatutory declared "[t]here are in" either count. Although concluding there was insufficient two relied by State Supreme Court affirmed sentence, declaring court balance against four properly applied factors. ruled facts suggesting were "so clear convincing reasonable person could differ," judicial override appropriate law. Federal District granted Parker's habeas corpus petition imposition penalty, ruling unconstitutional. Appeals reversed. Held: acted arbitrarily capriciously failing treat adequately evidence. Pp. 313-323. (a) judge's order imposing does explicitly what effect gave it must concluded weighed such before sentence. record contains substantial much uncontroverted, favoring mitigation. Moreover, declined indicating in murder. Furthermore, stated "that outweigh" circumstances, did, fact, exist. 313-318. (b) Thus, erred consequently its Where reviewing weighing strikes one more factors which sentencer relies, may, consistent with Constitution, reweigh remaining conduct harmless error analysis. Clemons v. Mississippi, 494 738, 741, 110 1441, ----, 108 725. an independent reweighing since took findings even if conducted analysis, analysis flawed court's ignoring record. federal give deference appellate resolution ambiguity statement, Wainwright Goode, 464 78, 83-85, 104 378, 381-382, 78 187, need do so where, here, conclusion is fairly supported case. 318-320. (c) Court's affirmance upon nonexistent invalid because deprived individualized treatment entitled Constitution. Clemons, supra, U.S., at 752, S.Ct., ----. 321-322. 876 F.2d 1470 (1989), reversed remanded. O'CONNOR, J., delivered opinion Court, MARSHALL, STEVENS, BLACKMUN, SOUTER, JJ., joined. WHITE, filed dissenting opinion, REHNQUIST, C.J., SCALIA KENNEDY, joined, post, p. ---. J. Link, Jacksonville, Fla., petitioner. Carolyn M. Snurkowski, Tallahassee, respondents. Justice O'CONNOR Court. 1 This case requires us determine precisely courts presented mitigation his whether meets constitutional requirements. 2 * On afternoon February 6, 1982, several others set off recover money owed them delivery illegal drugs. There followed nightmarish series events ended early morning hours 7 deaths Padgett, Jody Dalton, 3 Duval County, Florida, grand indicted Parker, former wife Elaine, Tommy Groover, William Long murders Elaine entered negotiated pleas second-degree Groover all three him counts third. 4 third-degree Dalton killing. argued also been trial. outweighed these 5 however, explained "this carefully studied considered testimony proceedings." App. 47. After various defined statute, present In order, conclude first count (Padgett murder) second (Sheppard murder)." Id., 61. 6 direct appeal, convictions sentences. State, 458 So.2d 750 (1984), cert. denied, 470 1088, 105 1855, 85 152 (1985). concluded, support death: "especially heinous, atrocious cruel," committed during robbery. So.2d, 754. Nonetheless, entire written consisting following: "The applied. light virtually differ. Tedder 322 908 (Fla.1975). proper this clearly place within class homicides penalty appropriate." Ibid. 8 pursued collateral without success, then writ United States Middle Florida. That denied convictions, penalty. 146. finding and, particular, Because, only when "virtually 908, 910 (Fla.1975) (per curiam ), failure find presence rendered 139-142. speculated might have failed consider thereby violating rule Hitchcock Dugger, 481 393, 107 1821, 95 347 (1987). 143. ordered hold resentencing hearing 120 days, vacate impose lesser 9 Eleventh Circuit (1989). agreed "copious phase." 1475, n. 7. As consequence, refused read silence indication circumstances: "Under least some present, they present. wrote '[t]here . murder).' (emphasis added)." 1475. We certiorari, 497 1023, 3270, 780 (1990), now reverse judgment remand further proceedings. II 10 presents related challenges crux contentions arbitrary capricious manner somewhat unusual we required reconstruct review. challenged found. 11 statute defines certain relevant Fla.Stat. §§ 921.141(5), 921.141(6) (1985 Supp.1990). may imposed where exist § 921.141(3) makes initial judge; imposes 921.141(2), 921.141(3). Both described statute. McCampbell 421 1072, 1075 (Fla.1982) ). counterbalance, goes circumstance. Jacobs 396 713, 718 (Fla.1981) If recommends rather than "the [are] differ." Tedder, 910. 12 here recommendation. detail factfinding each eight seven 48-60. specific mention Under "Findings Court," states: "There circumstances." 60-61. 13 What about evidence? question For example, witnesses trial, including testified influence large amounts alcohol drugs, LSD, murders. Tr. 1401-1402, 1497, 1540-1541, 1619, 1738-1739, 1834, 1836, 1880-1881. attorney emphasized none accomplices received Billy Long, admitted shooting Sheppard, allowed plead guilty 2366, 2378, 2491-2496. Finally, numerous behalf concerning background character. Their indicated difficult childhood, abusive, alcoholic father, positive adult relationship own children neighbors. 2322-2360. 14 assume passing thing, said did. "Before proceedings, presentence Investigation Report, applicable Statutes, other touching case." 47 added). refuse Jacobs, 718; Songer 365 696, 700 (Fla.1978) 441 956, 99 2185, 60 1060 (1979); Eddings Oklahoma, 455 104, 102 869, 71 (1982); Lockett Ohio, 438 586, 98 2954, 57 973 (1978) (plurality opinion). instructions recommendation, that, addition "[a]ny aspect defendant's character record, crime." 2506-2507. evidence—drug intoxication, lenient perpetrator crime, background—was type cases preclude override. See, Norris 429 688, 690 (1983) ) (defendant claimed intoxicated); Buckrem 355 111, 113-114 (same); Malloy 382 1190, 1193 (1979) (lesser triggerman); McCampbell, 1075-1076 (background character); (same). taken into account 15 credited although instructed jurors end "reasonably convinced" circumstance exists established. 2507; Bar, Standard Jury Instructions Criminal Cases 81 (1981 ed.). same standard himself. must, therefore, intoxication time uncontroverted. despite being triggerman lighter Parker. Respondent conceded fact oral argument Oral Arg. 35. And, noted, extensive going personal history provided 16 addition, every reviewed determined Appeals, petition, enough finding. 141-142; F.2d, agree. note make determination 754, quoted 311. To extent will weight 17 Perhaps strongest five 56-60. 48-56. Yet would nothing presumably overridden recommendations. 18 It differentially believed "clear differ" death, see 910, whereas meet test. decision solely Far likely, But, general directed reason think both. 19 best detailed reference likely explanation fact. By forth law more. Mason 374, 380 (Fla.1983), 465 1051, 1330, 79 725 (1984) (trial expressly address circumstance). Only very recently established requirement evaluate proposed defendant. Campbell 571 415 (1990). absence contain probably explains why discusses categorized Nonstatutory fall predefined category, considerably organize coherent discussion; though complete obviously helpful court, from perspective simpler merely conclude, true, together And stating "no 61 20 mitigation, differential sentences III 21 struck relied. nonetheless upheld "[t]he factors." characterization findings, 22 State; specified (1985); 1075; 718. unclear here. certainly affirming Had reliance. More point, made occasions e.g., Hudson 538 829, 831 493 875, 212, 165 (1989) ("It province reevaluate circumstances"); Brown Wainwright, 392 1327, 1331-1332 (1981) 23 heard practice Sireci 399 964, 971 (1981), 456 984, 2257, 72 862 Elledge 346 998, 1002-1003 (1977). here: Believing weigh them, elimination additional difference 24 cases—where present—is new hearing. ibid.; Moody 418 989, 995 (1982). Following compelled remand. instead actually do, ignore misread regarding affirm mischaracterization findings. 25 187 (1983), held statement. decide Goode issue resolved characterized case, historical depends examination transcript order. legal issue; legality necessarily follows 26 Because factual issue, owe designated 28 U.S.C. 2254. corpus, overturn unless "fairly record." 2254(d)(8); 85, 382. reasons stated, IV 27 "If should available crimes, administer way can rationally distinguish between individuals whom sanction not." Spaziano 468 447, 460, 3154, 3162, 82 340 (1984). Constitution prohibits irrational 466-467, 3165-3166. repeatedly crucial role meaningful ensuring irrationally. 749, ---- (citing cases); Gregg Georgia, 428 153, 96 2909, 49 859 (1976). specifically system minimizes risk error, noted "crucial protection" afforded cases. Dobbert 432 282, 295, 97 2290, 2299, 53 344 Proffitt 242, 253, 2960, 2967, 913 (1976) (joint STEWART, POWELL, JJ.); Spaziano, 465, 3164, sense all. cannot gainsaid actual "What important basis individual Zant Stephens, 462 862, 879, 103 2733, 2743-2744, 77 235 (1983). ----; Barclay 463 939, 958, 3418, 3429, 1134 neither nor reliance 29 crime. facts, "finding" arbitrary. 30 simply assessing records different presented. Similarly, finding, our different. Cf. Lewis Jeffers, 764, 3092, 606 But come conclusion, rely found; "findings" bear necessary relation striking considering V 31 return enter directing initiate proceedings reconsidered shall period express 32 questions certiorari dismissed improvidently granted. 33 ordered. 34 THE CHIEF JUSTICE, SCALIA, KENNEDY join, dissenting. 35 "It function agree majority Court." 467, 3166, long ago up guessing supreme situations Nevertheless, today undertakes performs task inconsistent precedents final arbiter issues great importance. Therefore, I dissent. 36 rests reconstruction likes rarely, ever, performed Once armed dubious proceeds " 'fairly record.' Ante, 320 (quoting 2254(d)(8)). relies assert "did here," ante, 321, admits thorough cause strike down judge. 322. ultimately concludes "meaningful review" which, fully apparently entitles relief Eighth Amendment it, actions conflict lines precedent. 37 First, application record" 2254(d)(8) gives far too little attempting apply their faithfully responsibly. remarkably similar one, considerable determinations court. defendant factor deciding improper factor. review, after best, ambiguous substituting view 38 distinction Goode. Here, seizes inherent use word "that," arguing meant aggravators meaning all.1 interpreted statement latter fashion. 39 refute it. ambiguous, Justices strong ambiguous. judge—in following writing, (1985)—was tracking language him, chooses "[t]hat 921.141(3)(b). itself require specify outweighed, disturb 40 Our recent confirms traditionally state-court rejected contention second-guess existence rational factfinder 780-781, differentiate opposed acknowledged deferential vary depending level court; 382; 783, 41 Even troubling creation unexplained suggests "error" "misreading" conclusive independently claims "arbitrary" violation 42 holding faulty assumption nature findings2 event finds previously interpretation remarks particular exist, determination, essentially unreviewable 84, 381; axiomatic mere errors concern Gryger Burke, 334 728, 731, 68 1256, 1257, 92 L.Ed. 1683 (1948); (1983); 86, 383; Pulley Harris, 37, 41, 871, 874, (1984); "views State's highest respect binding courts." 747, violated decides capital rigorously procedure. points supporting radical revision jurisprudence. 43 identifies factors.3 Indeed, notes "he did." 314. Absent how dimensions. "does not, terms, regulate procedures substance punishment." Walton Arizona, 639, 670, 3047, 3066, 511 (1990) (SCALIA, concurring part judgment). "Thus, procedural elements scheme prohibition, all, systematically render infliction cruel punishment 'unusual.' accept infirmity judgment. 44 Of course, entirely apart propositions today, house cards topples statements plausibly premised discussion statement: 45 46 concedes prefatory indicates 314-315, asserts mean above, Court—hard try—cannot escape Accordingly, defer implausible "drug [and Parker's] background," 315, murder." 316. proposition, according flows same, surely 737. 48 reasoning ignores differences crimes. superficially appear significant, reality is, "committed purpose avoiding preventing lawful arrest effecting custody." 57. seriously disputed primary, sole, motive killing readily distinguishes killed dispute over payment confronted drug debts, junkyard "where engaged fist fight." 40. They drove deserted area "Groover shot death," ibid., toyed victim cat mouse." 59. willing participant alone victim. 50 contrast, teenager, innocent bystander connection her boyfriend Padgett. tricked accompanying scene brutally pathetic attempt avoid detection orders, head she knelt near Padgett's body. 58, threatened kill shoot id., 56, 59, threat driven home imprisoned 1257-1259, 1340, 1884, 1888, himself slit Sheppard's throat insure job done. resort imaginative stretch engages chosen 51 Likewise, reveals "must" sufficiently disparity accomplice, another creative theory feared "forced Sheppard," "threats Long," "threatened forced "cut ring necklace," finally "ordered killed," her, "screamed 'shoot again, again.' previously, idea effectively threaten credible Long. 1888. Incredibly, erroneous, culpable regard case.4 Neither common supports assertion. 52 intoxication" "character Again, compels conclusion. With "intoxication" circumstance, references involve inconclusive questioned counsel obvious establish intoxicated drugs alcohol, 1738, self-serving corroborated physical medical most equivocal. asked companions high went get replied "[a]s know. didn't ask seemed like were." 1402. Denise visited committed, saw them. Her response "[w]ell, there's just you hung over. looked drunk." 1619. recalled witness, Bradley, seen "they drinking couple beers something, control theirselves." 1632. 54 urged argument, reasonably show 34. point leading affected alcohol.5 persuasiveness background" depended credibility definite interest seeing death.6 say credit submissions establishing 55 attempts explain away 317. strange suggestion, particularly assertion "there circumstances" means outweighed. merit "weighing," expect plausible rose circumstances.7 56 countenance departure prior dissent Appeals.8 Apparently, Instead "to" used "that" 318. semantic acrobatics well taken. (1) (and definition circumstances) (2) so, desperate contrary extremely inappropriate ill advised. never opening brief rehearing, extensively Brief Appellant 63,700 (Fla.Sup.Ct.), pp. 73, 77-79; Reply 23-25; Petition 1-5. preposterous unaware ("Nowhere non-statutory factors"). 77-79, 82-83. interpretation. "conceded 316, misleading. defendants receive answered case—I valid Mr. participation 36. concede "got sentence," 35, concede, implies, insignificant capacity appreciate criminality conduct, conform requirements substantially impaired. 921.141(6)(f) Supp. 1990). alleged impairment alcohol. 2481-2483. Defense incredibly asserted "had drunk beer" night drunkenness "why [Parker's wife] drove." 2482 found: Never, time, contended insane incompetent crime trial—nor impaired ability appreciated conduct—but acting appreciation, murdered persons prevent disclosure examined private psychiatrist, slightly 52-53 Witnesses testifying included mother, grandmother, sister, cousin. recognized deferred to, action comports cases, 955, 3427, problem.

Category: 0