Richmond v. Arizona

Background

Willie Lee Richmond, a man sentenced to death in Arizona, asked a Justice to suspend this Court’s earlier denial of review or to stay his execution set for September 14, 1977. Richmond had challenged the Arizona capital statute for allowing only a short list of mitigating factors, arguing it prevented consideration of a defendant’s character, age, or lack of prior crimes. The Arizona Supreme Court limited mitigation to the enumerated factors, denied rehearing, and Richmond’s petition for certiorari to this Court was denied on June 27, 1977, with two Justices dissenting.

Reasoning

The Justice evaluated whether the petition for rehearing showed any reasonable likelihood the full Court would change its mind and grant review. He concluded it did not. Richmond did not identify facts—such as being a minor, low intelligence, or lack of prior criminal record—that would make an expanded list of mitigating factors relevant to his case. The record instead shows a prior kidnapping conviction and only psychological testimony labeling him a sociopath. The Justice also noted that an argument that juries must find aggravating or mitigating facts was unlikely to succeed given this Court’s prior decision, and that the grant in a separate case, Bell v. Ohio, did not make Richmond’s petition likely to succeed.

Real world impact

Because there is no reasonable likelihood of the Court granting rehearing, the Justice denied the request to suspend the earlier denial or to stay the execution. That leaves the scheduled execution in place unless other relief is obtained. This ruling does not decide the broader constitutional questions on the merits and could be revisited if different facts or arguments are later presented.

Dissents or concurrances

When certiorari was denied earlier, Justices Brennan and Marshall dissented from that denial, but their views did not change the Justice’s conclusion to deny a stay or suspension here.