Legal Opinion
Robertson v. Cockrell
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided March 14, 2003No. 00-10512PublishedCited by 61 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EDITH H. JONES, Circuit Judge:
In Penry v. Lynaugh, 492 U.S. 302, 109 S.Ct. 2934, 106 L.Ed.2d 256 (1989) (“Penry I ”), the United States Supreme Court held that the first two “special issue” interrogatories in the Texas capital sentencing instruction,1 though facially valid, see Jurek v. Texas, 428 U.S. 262, 96 S.Ct. 2950, 49 L.Ed.2d 929 (1976), failed to satisfy the constitutional requirement that a capital defendant be entitled to present to his jury — and have it give mitigating effect to — proffered evidence of childhood abuse. Twelve years later, following Penny's second trial,…
2Cases cited84 opinions
- Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Lockett v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Lindh v. MurphySupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Eddings v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
79 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by61 opinions
- Tennard v. Dretke, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions DivisionSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Smith v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Cotton v. CockrellCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2003
- Bagwell v. DretkeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2004
- Ex Parte StaleyCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2005
56 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.