Summary

Thurgood Marshall Watkins v. Murray — Dissenting Opinion

Even if I did not take this view, I would grant the petition to decide whether a court's failure either to inform a capital sentencing jury that it must consider mitigating evidence or to explain the concept of mitigation undermines a capital defendant's right to have the jury "consider and give effect to any mitigating evidence relevant to a defendant's background and character or the circumstances of the crime."
Source: Wikisource

Thurgood Marshall Watkins v. Murray — Dissenting Opinion

Even if the juries were aware of their obligation to consider mitigating evidence, the instructions provided absolutely no guidance on what constitutes relevant mitigating evidence or how the juries should have considered such evidence. "Mitigating evidence" is a term of art, with a constitutional meaning that is unlikely to be apparent to a lay jury.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature