810
Opinion of Thomas, J.
273-274 (opinion of Stewart, Powell, and Stevens, JJ.). Then, while purporting to distinguish, rather than to overrule, Jurek, this Court in Penry I determined that the same Texas statute was constitutionally insufficient by not permitting jurors to give effect to mitigating evidence. 492 U. S., at 328. See also id., at 355-356 (Scalia, J., dissenting) (explaining how Penry I contradicts Jurek's conclusions). According to the Court, an instruction informing the jury that it could give effect to the mitigating evidence was necessary. 492 U. S., at 328. And in today's decision, this Court yet again has second-guessed itself and decided that even this supplemental instruction is not constitutionally sufficient.
Page: Index Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29Last modified: October 4, 2007