Douglas Mcarthur Buchanan, JR. v. Ronald J. Angelone, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, et al. (522 U.S. 269)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided January 21, 1998 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 522 U.S. 269 · 118 S. Ct. 757
- Decided
- January 21, 1998
- Term
- October Term 1997
- Vote
- 6–3
- Majority author
- Justice Rehnquist
- Issue area
- Criminal Procedure
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
CHIEF Justice Rehnquist delivered the opinion of the Court. This case calls on us to decide whether the Eighth Amendment requires that a capital jury be instructed on the concept of mitigating evidence generally, or on particular statutory mitigating factors. We hold it does not. On the afternoon of September 15, 1987, Douglas Buchanan murdered his father, stepmother, and two younger brothers. Buchanan was convicted of the capital murder of more than one person as part of the same act or transaction by a jury in the Circuit Court of Amherst County, Virginia. See Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-31(7) (1996). A separate sentencing hearing was held, in which the prosecutor sought the death penalty on the basis of Virginia’s aggravating factor that the crime was vile. See Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-264.3 (1995). In his opening statement in this proceeding, the prosecutor told the jury that he would be asking for the death penalty based on vileness. He conceded that Buchanan had had a troubled childhood and informed the jury that it would have to balance the things in petitioner’s favor against the crimes he had committed. App. 25-27. Defense counsel outlined the mitigating evidence he would present and told the jury that he was asking that petitioner not-be executed based on that evidence. Id., at 29. . For two days, the jury heard evidence from seven defense witnesses and eight prosecution…
Excerpt of a 18,371-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.