Parks v. Saffle
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
EBEL, Circuit Judge.
The issue to be decided in this, our second en banc consideration of petitioner’s habeas petition, is whether the prosecutor’s anti-sympathy comments combined with an anti-sympathy instruction given by the court during the penalty stage of petitioner’s capital trial influenced the jury improperly to discount mitigating evidence presented by the defendant. The United States Supreme Court in Saffle v. Parks, — U.S. —, 110 S.Ct. 1257, 108 L.Ed.2d 415 (1990), held that the anti-sympathy jury instruction by itself did not violate the defendant Robyn Leroy Parks’ constitutional…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Lockett v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Eddings v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Penry v. LynaughSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Boyde v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Hooker v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1995
- Lay v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 1994
- Robyn Leroy Parks v. Dan Reynolds, Warden, Oklahoma State Penitentiary, Susan B. Loving, Attorney General, State of OklahomaCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1992
- Robison v. MaynardCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1992
- State v. DawsonSuperior Court of Delaware · 1995
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.