Cite as: 527 U. S. 373 (1999)
Opinion of the Court
ing factor been precisely defined. See Clemons v. Mississippi, 494 U. S. 738, 753-754. The Fifth Circuit performed the first sort of analysis, and its explanation appears sufficient. Even if its analysis was too perfunctory, it is plain, under the alternative mode of harmless-error analysis, that the error indeed was harmless. Had the nonstatutory aggravating factors been precisely defined in writing, the jury would have reached the same recommendation as it did. The Government's argument to the jury cured the factors of any infirmity as written. Pp. 402-405.
Thomas, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I, II, and III-B, in which Rehnquist, C. J., and O'Connor, Scalia, and Kennedy, JJ., joined, and an opinion with respect to Part III-A, in which Rehnquist, C. J., and O'Connor and Kennedy, JJ., joined. Ginsburg, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Stevens and Souter, JJ., joined, and in which Breyer, J., joined as to Parts I, II, III, and V, post, p. 405.
Timothy Crooks argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs was Timothy W. Floyd.
Deputy Solicitor General Dreeben argued the cause for the United States. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Waxman, Assistant Attorney General Robinson, Matthew D. Roberts, and Sean Connelly.*
Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court, except as to Part III-A.†
Petitioner was sentenced to death for committing a kidnaping resulting in death to the victim. His sentence was imposed under the Federal Death Penalty Act of 1994, 18 U. S. C. § 3591 et seq. (1994 ed. and Supp. III). We are presented with three questions: whether petitioner was entitled to an instruction as to the effect of jury deadlock; whether there is a reasonable likelihood that the jury was led to believe that petitioner would receive a court-imposed sentence
*Kent S. Scheidegger and Charles L. Hobson filed a brief for the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation as amicus curiae urging affirmance.
†Justice Scalia joins all but Part III-A of the opinion.
375
Page: Index Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NextLast modified: October 4, 2007