Skipper v. South Carolina

Background

A man convicted in South Carolina of capital murder and rape faced a separate jury sentencing hearing where the State introduced evidence of his prior sexually assaultive conduct. He and family members testified about his difficult upbringing and that he had behaved well during the seven and a half months he spent in jail awaiting trial. He sought to call two jailers and a regular jail visitor to say he had "made a good adjustment," but the trial judge excluded that evidence under state court rulings and the jury imposed the death penalty.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court reviewed whether excluding testimony about his good behavior in jail violated the requirement that sentencers consider any relevant mitigating evidence. The Court said prior decisions require that juries not be prevented from hearing aspects of a defendant’s character or record that could support a lesser sentence. It noted the prosecutor argued the defendant would be dangerous in prison, even suggesting he might rape other inmates, and held that barring testimony from neutral jail witnesses was prejudicial.

Real world impact

The Court reversed the state high court’s decision and vacated the death sentence, remanding for a new sentencing hearing at which the defendant may present any relevant mitigating evidence, including testimony about his conduct in jail. The ruling means defendants in capital cases can generally offer evidence of their behavior in custody when that evidence bears on likely future behavior or rebuts prosecution claims. The State may still seek the death penalty again.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Powell, joined by the Chief Justice and Justice Rehnquist, agreed the sentence must be vacated but would have rested reversal on due process grounds — that the defendant was denied an opportunity to rebut the prosecution’s claim about future dangerousness — and cautioned that States should have room to exclude post-arrest prison behavior except when used to rebut prosecution arguments.