Ayers v. Belmontes
549 U.S. ___ (2006)

Annotate this Case

549 U. S. ____ (2006)
549 U. S. ____ (2006)
549 U. S. ____ (2006)
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
NO. 05-493

ROBERT L. AYERS, Jr., Acting Warden, PETI- TIONER v. FERNANDO BELMONTES

on writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit

[November 13, 2006]

   Justice Scalia, with whom Justice Thomas joins, concurring.

   I adhere to my view that limiting a jury’s discretion to consider all mitigating evidence does not violate the Eighth Amendment. See Walton v. Arizona, 497 U. S. 639, 673 (1990) (Scalia, J., concurring in part and concurring in judgment). Even accepting the Court’s jurisprudence to the contrary, however, this is arguably an easy case, given our reiteration in Johnson v. Texas, 509 U. S. 350, 372 (1993), that a jury need only “be able to consider in some manner all of a defendant’s relevant mitigating evidence,” and need not “be able to give effect to mitigating evidence in every conceivable manner in which the evidence might be relevant.” But since petitioner has not relied on Johnson, as Judge O’Scannlain did below, see Belmontes v. Brown, 414 F. 3d 1094, 1141–1142 (CA9 2005) (opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part), I am content to join in full the Court’s opinion, which correctly applies Boyde v. California, 494 U. S. 370 (1990).

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.