Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

O'Dell Vs. Netherland

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 19, 1997

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

71 entries 8 linked 63 unlinked
Show
  1. Butler Vs. Mckellar US Supreme Court · Mar 05, 1990
  2. Stringer Vs. Black US Supreme Court · Dec 09, 1991
  3. Penry Vs. Lynaugh US Supreme Court · Jun 26, 1989
  4. King Vs. Lynaugh US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1989
  5. Lambrix Vs. Singletary US Supreme Court · May 12, 1997
  6. Graham Vs. Collins US Supreme Court · Oct 14, 1992
  7. Saffle Vs. Parks US Supreme Court · Mar 05, 1990
  8. Turner Vs. Murray US Supreme Court · Apr 30, 1986
  9. U.S. 151 (1997) October Term, 1996 Syllabus O'Dell V. Netherland
    Search
  10. granting federal habeas relief, the District Court concluded that this Court's intervening decision in Simmons v. South
    Search
  11. rule within the meaning of Teague v. Lane
    Search
  12. whether that new rule nonetheless falls within one of two narrow exceptions to the Teague doctrine. Lambrix v. Singletary
    Search
  13. to petitioner's position, the result in Simmons did not follow ineluctably from the decisions in Gardner v. Florida
    Search
  14. U. S. 349 , and Skipper v. South
    Search
  15. related to the defendant was also at the heart of two other cases in 1988's complex legal landscape. In California v. Ramos
    Search
  16. much (if at all) juries would be informed about the postsentencing legal regime was given further credence in Caldwell v. Mississippi
    Search
  17. the fundamental fairness and accuracy of the criminal proceeding under the second exception to Teague. Gideon v. Wainwright
    Search
  18. THOMAS delivered the opinion of the Court. This case presents the question whether the rule set out in Simmons v. South
    Search
  19. within the meaning of Teague v. Lane
    Search
  20. Petitioner appealed to the Supreme Court of Virginia, which affirmed both the conviction and the sentence. O'Dell v. Commonwealth
    Search
  21. Va. 672, 364 S. E. 2d 491 (1988). We denied certiorari. O'Dell v. Virginia
    Search
  22. S. 871 (1988). Petitioner's efforts at state habeas relief were unsuccessful, and we again denied certiorari. O'Dell v. Thompson
    Search
  23. of a death sentence was based only on the first aggravating factor-petitioner's future dangerousness. O'Dell v. Commonwealth
    Search
  24. the jury of his ineligibility for parole. The District Court rejected petitioner's claim of innocence. O'Dell v. Thompson
    Search
  25. But it agreed with petitioner that he was entitled to resentencing under the intervening decision in Simmons v. South
    Search
  26. We have stated variously the formula for determining when a rule is new. See, e. g., Graham v. Collins
    Search
  27. is conducted in three steps. First, the date on which the defendant's conviction became final is determined. Lambrix v. Singletary
    Search
  28. Ibid. (quoting Saffle v. Parks
    Search
  29. Id., at 169. The plurality, relying on Gardner v. Florida
    Search
  30. U. S. 349 (1977), and Skipper v. South
    Search
  31. or to be informed-through argument or instruction-of the possibility of commutation, pardon, or parole.' California v. Ramos
    Search
  32. cf. Sawyer v. Smith
    Search
  33. U. S. 227 , 236-237 (1990) (citing, as evidence that Caldwell v. Mississippi
    Search
  34. Petitioner's review of the relevant precedent discloses the decisions relied upon in Simmons, namely, Gardner v. Florida
    Search
  35. supra, and Skipper v. South
    Search
  36. providing the narrowest grounds of decision among the Justices whose votes were necessary to the judgment. Cf. Marks v. United
    Search
  37. Simmons v. South
    Search
  38. U. S. 992 (1983), and Caldwell v. Mississippi
    Search
  39. eligibility, was silence. Teague asks state-court judges to judge reasonably, not presciently. See Stringer v. Black
    Search
  40. By 1988, no state or federal court had adopted the rule of Simmons. In fact, both before and after Skipper v. South
    Search
  41. challenge practices similar, if not identical, to that later forbidden in Simmons. See, e. g., Turner v. Bass
    Search
  42. F.2d 342 , 354 (CA4 1985), rev'd on other grounds sub nom. Turner v. Murray
    Search
  43. O'Bryan v. Estelle
    Search
  44. F.2d 365 , 389 (CA5 1983), cert. denied sub nom. O'Bryan v. McKaskle
    Search
  45. Peterson v. Murray
    Search
  46. Knox v. Collins
    Search
  47. see also Turner v. Commonwealth
    Search
  48. Mueller v. Commonwealth
    Search
  49. along with the Fourth Circuit in this case, concluded that the rule of Simmons was new. See, e. g., Johnson v. Scott
    Search
  50. F.3d 106 , 111-112, n. 11 (CA5 1995), cert. denied sub nom. Johnson v. Johnson
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial