Hopkins v. Reeves

Background

A Nebraska man was tried for two killings at a meetinghouse and prosecuted only on felony-murder charges. He asked the jury be instructed on second-degree murder and manslaughter, but the trial judge refused because the Nebraska Supreme Court had long held those offenses are not lesser included offenses of felony murder. The jury convicted him and a three-judge panel later imposed death. The Eighth Circuit granted habeas relief under Beck, and the State appealed to the Supreme Court.

Reasoning

The Court asked whether Beck requires judges to instruct juries on crimes that state law does not recognize as lesser included offenses. The Court said no. It explained Beck addressed a rule that, in capital cases, withdrew an option that state law otherwise allowed and so created an all-or-nothing choice for juries. Nebraska’s practice simply followed state law that felony murder has no lesser included homicide offenses and did not single out capital cases. The Court concluded the Constitution does not require instructions on offenses that are not lesser included under state law and reversed the Court of Appeals.

Real world impact

The ruling lets state trial courts refuse instructions on offenses state law does not recognize as lesser included, limiting federal intervention in such refusals in capital felony-murder trials. It affirms that states may define offenses and that juries need not decide crimes the prosecution did not try to prove. Nebraska’s judicial sentencing procedure meant the jury here was not the sentencer.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Stevens dissented, arguing that when the State seeks death the Nebraska rule may not apply, and that under Enmund and Tison a jury should have been allowed to consider second-degree murder because culpable intent to kill matters before imposing death.