Legal Document

506 U.S. 40 113 S.Ct. 528 121 L.Ed.2d 411 Willie Lee RICHMOND, Petitioner,v.Samuel A. LEWIS, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections, et al. No. 91-7094. Argued Oct. 13, 1992. Decided Dec. 1, Syllabus * RICHMOND v. Following a sentencing hearing on petitioner Richmond's first degree murder conviction, the trial judge found three statutory aggravating factors, including, under Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 13-703(F)(6), that offense was committed in an "especially heinous, cruel or depraved manner" ((F)(6) factor). Concluding also there were no mitigating circumstances sufficiently substantial to warrant leniency, sentenced Richmond death. The State Supreme Court affirmed, with each five justices joining one opinions. Among other things, principal opinion for two (F)(6) factor—which had been narrowed Gretzler, 135 Ariz. 42, 659 P.2d subsequent sentencing—was applicable. conducted independent review sentence and concluded mitigation evidence did not outweigh factors. In special concurrence, disagreed came within factor as by but agreed death appropriate even absent factor. fifth justice filed dissenting urging reversal. After this denied certiorari, Federal District declined grant habeas corpus relief, Appeals affirmed. Held: violates Eighth Amendment. unconstitutionally vague at time gave it weight. Walton Arizona, 497 639, 654, 110 3047, 3073, 111 511. cure error, because specially concurring actually reweigh affirming sentence. See, e.g., Clemons Mississippi, 494 738, 1441, 108 725. Those purport perform new calculus, mention mitigation. Nor can such reweighing be presumed, since language concurrence plainly indicates aggravated criminal background provided conclusive justification penalty, thereby evincing sort automatic affirmance rule proscribed "weighing" Arizona. Id., 751, 1450. Because majority curative voting affirm sentence, question whether properly relied Gretzler need decided Court. Pp. ____. 948 F.2d 1473 (CA9, 1990), reversed remanded. O'CONNOR, J., delivered Court, which REHNQUIST, C.J., WHITE, BLACKMUN, STEVENS, KENNEDY, SOUTER, THOMAS, JJ., joined. opinion. SCALIA, Timothy K. Ford, Seattle, Wash., petitioner. Paul Joseph McMurdie, Phoenix, Ariz., respondent. Justice O'CONNOR 1 case is has cured petitioner's vagueness error. 2 On August 25, 1973, Bernard Crummett misfortune meet Rebecca Corella Tucson, bar. left bar and, parking lot, met petitioner, who waiting his girlfriend, Faith Erwin. act prostitution Crummett, drove group Corella's hotel. There, communicated "loaded," turn whispered Erwin he intended rob Crummett. 3 their encounter hotel, again went drive, deserted area outside where, believed, would another prostitution. Petitioner stopped car got out. He struck ground next threw several large rocks Crummett's head. watch wallet taken Corella, both, these then away Either driving, whoever over twice. suffered injuries head trunk, died. 4 charged robbery murder. testified jury admitted she intoxicated heroin time. A defense witness stated previously identified driver. Neither nor took stand, although prosecution introduce postarrest statement acknowledged robbing claimed There medical testimony crushed head, killing him, vehicular, place least 30 seconds later. 5 convicted both instructed elements felony well premeditated murder; conviction returned general verdict. Judge Roylston held penalty required 13-703 (1989), codified 13-454, 15-20 years' imprisonment robbery. factors: prior involving use threat violence person, 13-703(F)(2) (an armed kidnapping), "committed especially manner," 13-703(F)(6) Specifically, Roylston's written order "the Defendant commit heinous manner." App. 44. explicit finding about identity driver vehicle. 6 unsuccessfully sought postconviction relief court, attaching affidavits persons have told she, affirmed denial relief. Richmond, 114 186, 560 41 (1976). Although ambiguous point, appears reach challenge depraved" supported valid factors applied. 196-197, P.2d, 51-52. We certiorari. 433 915, 97 2988, 53 1101 (1977). proceedings ensued, result invalid constrained consider limited set Cardwell, 450 F.Supp. 519 (Ariz.1978). Soon thereafter, statute unconstitutional insofar defendants Watson, 120 441, 444-445, 586 1253, 1256-1257 (1978), vacated every pending see Brief Respondents 5. 7 Petitioner's resentencing March 1980. At hearing, driver, while same. produced rehabilitation prison effect execution family. death, circumstances: (prior violent felony) ("especially offense), before, 13-703(F)(1) meriting life imprisonment), charge after though predated Crummett's. Once again, 74, explicitly find findings were, among others, "Rebecca involved never any crime"; "Faith [E]rwin matters relating rule, murder"; Defendant's family . will suffer considerable grief might imposed." 75. unable make definitive "there are call leniency." 76. 8 divided 136 312, 666 57 (1983) (Richmond II). Chief Holohan wrote himself Hays, rejecting various challenges including reasoned "heinous" "depraved" (but "cruel") vague: 9 "In [State cert. denied, 461 971, 103 2444, 77 1327 ], we discussed lead heinousness depravity. One infliction gratuitous victim; related needless mutilation victim. Here victim already unconscious bleeding when run once, twice, from different direction. vehicle victim's crushing skull him. second body Again fact instant twice crushed, ghastly victim." 319, 64. 10 concluding offered [petitioner] [three] circumstances." 321, 66. 11 Cameron, joined Vice Gordon, concurrence. "I concur [principal opinion] except its crime depraved, I result." 324, 69. contended neither "gratuitous violence" "needless mutilation" meaning (1983). Gratuitous obtained only if "knew should known dead pass car"—if "inflicted must 'beyond point necessary kill.' " II, 323, 68. Similarly, interpreted mean "distinct acts, apart killing, specifically performed mutilate body." Ibid. But 12 Feldman dissented. argued precluded 324-325, 69-70. 13 464 986, 104 435, 78 367 action United States challenging conviction. Ricketts, 640 767 (1986), Ninth Circuit 921 933 (1990). As factor, panel narrowing construction imposed II alternative, could stand without despite our decision 725 "Elimination challenged still leave enough support [petitioner's] issue here 'weighing' statute." F.2d, 947. later amended omit reasoned: "Under Clemons, invalidation circumstance necessarily renders 'weightier' more relative sense; same, however, cannot said terms here." 1473, 1488-1489 (1992). 14 rehearing en banc, four judges dissenting. 1476. granted 503 ----, 112 1557, 118 206 (1992), now reverse. 15 argues specified upon relied, vague, failed invalidity II. 16 relevant Amendment law defined. First, fails furnish principled guidance choice between lesser penalty. Maynard Cartwright, 486 356, 361-364, 1853, 1857-59, 100 372 (1988); Godfrey Georgia, 446 420, 427-433, 1759, 1764-1767, 64 398 (1980). Second, State, where balanced against other, constitutional error sentencer give weight obtain. Stringer Black, 1130, 1136-1137, 117 (1992); supra, 748-752, S.Ct., 1448. Third, state appellate court may rely adequate curing See Lewis Jeffers, 764, 3092, 606 (1990); 511 Finally, federal proceedings, court's application reviewed "rational factfinder" standard Jackson Virginia, 443 307, 99 2781, 61 (1979). U.S., 781, 3104. 17 Arizona's supra. explained, serious argument [this factor] facially vague." 3057. do argue adequately resentencing. Thus indeed respondents agree engage weighing process. 44 ("Arizona Is Weighing State"). provides: 18 determining impose shall take into account included section finds 13-703(E) (1989). 19 This provision governed remains unamended part. Read most naturally, requires weigh circumstances—to determine "substan[ce]" kinds And construed thus Brewer, 170 486, 504, 826 783, 801, 502 206, 147 54-55, 13-14; Valencia, 132 248, 250, 645 239, 241 (1982); Brookover, 124 38, 601 1322, 1326 contend judge's calculus therefore harmless. 20 Rather, they issued 777-778, ---- (holding definitions factor); 652-655, (same). assert applied ignored opinions reweighed. improperly reweigh. 21 Our cases specify clarity otherwise 750-752, 1449-1450; cf. Sochor Florida, 504 2114, 2123, 119 326 (1992) (discussing harmless-error analysis); - (same), so here. minimum, "[W]hen decision, reviewing assume made difference thumb removed death's side scale," id., 1137, "cure" deciding, itself, weightier than "[O]nly analysis level suffices guarantee defendant received individualized sentence." Ibid., 1137. Where infected constitutionally some stand. 22 suggest presume reweighing, obligation part "independent review" sentences, Justices Cameron Gordon concurred portion articulated obligation. force suggestion, presumption overcome itself. arguing satisfy brief explanation why justified nonetheless. 23 "The record defendant, clearly places him above norm murderers. kidnapping, arising separate incidents. history just 24 ifies imposition penalty." 323-324, 68-69. 25 plain passage evinces state—"a authorizing requiring long circumstance." 26 erred relying (F)(6), contends refrained Crummett; before suffice determination; apply unless knew dead. dispute points, Hays driver; implicit score; applicable parties minority relies particular reliance legitimate. 8-33; Reply 3. deciding correct point. Instead, simply ought done so. 27 Of course, petition state-law 780, ----. federal, "so arbitrary capricious constitute due process violation." reads follows: 28 "[T]he concepts involve killer's vile mind murder, evidenced actions. suggested specific 29 "[One 31 "[Another] 51-52, 10-11. 32 murderer intentionally drives arguably commits knows pass. An murderer. true knowledge condition matter law, itself proposition, "federal does lie errors law." 3102. hand, that, facts case, preclude drive Tr. Oral Arg. 38-39. Cf. Tison 481 137, 156-158, 107 1676, 1687-1688, 95 127 (1987) (conduct short intentional show culpable mental justifies penalty). 33 decide remained boundaries needed proper vote initial 27, 49, n. 16. Thus, assuming reweighed, votes validate needed, none. voted dissenter Therefore invalid, III 34 tainted calculus. stands, 35 reverse judgment remand instructions return enter granting writ reasonable period either corrects vacates imposes consistent law. 36 It ordered. 37 concurring. 38 holds violated (1990), failing present case. claim purposes Teague Lane, 489 288, 109 1060, 334 consequently unavailable reason, presumably, foreclosed arguable basis" February 1985 view "was permitted multiple invalid." Under Stringer, excused failure reweigh; jurist "automatic affirmance" Amendment.* 39 dissent continue think wrongly decided. particular, remain convinced transformed Teague's retroactivity principle validates "reasonableness" mandates "prescience." 1144 (SOUTER, dissenting). Had differently, complain Constitution 1983 neglecting Nevertheless, good reweigh, join Court's today Cameron's having thereupon remaining Holohan's applying limiting circumstance, (1983), "heinous." 42 eligible circumstance. Even accepting arguments regard beyond found—namely, "been imposable" (specifically, first-degree murder), 13-703(F)(1), "previously person" kidnaping), 13-703(F)(2). 73-74. unquestionably complied requirement line commencing Furman 408 238, 92 2726, 346 (1972). my colorable basis, text national tradition, imposing further evidence, 671-673, (1990) (SCALIA, judgment). docket amply show, recently invented introduced mandated arbitrariness quite inconsistent Furman, impenetrable complexity hence propensity scandal mockery capital 43 Since compliance all required, "heinousness" harmless, raises question. Accordingly, affirm. syllabus constitutes prepared Reporter Decisions convenience reader. Detroit Lumber Co., 200 337, 282, 287, 50 L.Ed. 499. became final November 14, 1983—15 months Stringer's final. imagine, distinction inapplicable rested premise "emerges single case," "long authority," "line authority" consists entirely final, 1135-1137.

Classification Label: 0