LaRoyce Lathair Smith v. Texas

Subject:

Capital Sentencing, Death Penalty, Penry v. Johnson, Mitigation, Mitigating Evidence

1. In Smith v. Texas, 543 U.S. 37 (2004), this Court summarily reversed the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and found constitutional error under Penry v. Lynaugh, 492 U.S.302 (1989) (Penry I), and Penry v. Johnson, 532 U.S. 782 (2001) (Penry II). Is it consistent with this Court’s remand in this case for the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to deem the error in petitioner’s case harmless based on its view that jurors were in fact able to give adequate consideration and effect to petitioner’s mitigating evidence notwithstanding this Court’s conclusion to the contrary?
   
   
2. Can the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, based on a procedural determination that it declined to adopt in its original decision that this Court then summarily reversed, impose on remand a daunting standard of harm (“egregious harm”) to the constitutional violation found by this Court?

• Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Opinion Filed: March 1, 2006
• United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: October 6, 2006

Resources:

• Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
• Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket

Briefs:     Parties Petition Phase Certiorari Petition Brief in Opposition Reply to Brief in Opposition Amici Brief of the Hon. John Gibbons, et al. in Support of Petitioner Merits Phase Petitioner's Brief Respondent's Brief - Coming Soon	Counsel of Record For Petitioner Smith: Jordan Steiker Austin, TX For Respondent Texas : R. Ted Cruz Solicitor General Office of the Attorney General Austin, TX
Oct | Nov | Dec | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | Unscheduled | Previous Terms   To view PDF files listed on this page you will need Adobe Acrobat Reader