Summary

Portrait of Sandra Day O'Connor Sandra Day O'Connor Parker v. Dugger — Opinion of the Court

Nonstatutory evidence, precisely because it does not fall into any predefined category, is considerably more difficult to organize into a coherent discussion; even though a more complete explanation is obviously helpful to a reviewing court, from the trial judge's perspective it is simpler merely to conclude, in those cases where it is true, that such evidence taken together does not outweigh the aggravating circumstances. And so the judge did, stating that he found "no mitigating circumstances that outweigh the aggravating circumstances."
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Sandra Day O'Connor Sandra Day O'Connor Parker v. Dugger — Opinion of the Court

The Florida Supreme Court did not conduct an independent review here. In fact, there is a sense in which the court did not review Parker's sentence at all.
It cannot be gainsaid that meaningful appellate review requires that the appellate court consider the defendant's actual record. "What is important . . . is an individualized determination on the basis of the character of the individual and the circumstances of the crime."
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Sandra Day O'Connor Sandra Day O'Connor Parker v. Dugger — Opinion of the Court

For the reasons stated, we find that the Florida Supreme Court's conclusion that the trial judge found no mitigating circumstances is not fairly supported by the record in this case.
"If a State has determined that death should be an available penalty for certain crimes, then it must administer that penalty in a way that can rationally distinguish between those individuals for whom death is an appropriate sanction and those for whom it is not."
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature