Burger v. Zant

Background

A person sentenced to death challenged the outcome of a second sentencing hearing after an earlier sentencing had been vacated. The lower district court and the Court of Appeals had adopted one another’s views when reviewing the case, and the Supreme Court granted review limited to a specific question labeled Question 1(B). The Court also allowed the defendant to proceed without paying fees.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court explained that the district court may have been mistaken about what the defendant’s lawyer actually argued at the second sentencing, confusing it with arguments from the earlier, vacated proceeding. Because that possible mistake could have affected the assessment of whether counsel acted reasonably, the Court vacated the judgment and sent the case back to the Eleventh Circuit. The Court instructed the appeals court to reconsider the effectiveness of the lawyer’s assistance at the second sentencing under the Strickland v. Washington standard for ineffective assistance of counsel. The practical result is that the defendant is entitled to a fresh, unaffected review of that claim.

Real world impact

The ruling requires the appellate court to reexamine the lawyer’s performance at the later sentencing and could change whether the death sentence stands. It tells lower courts to apply the Strickland test when reviewing counsel’s actions in sentencing. This order is not a final decision on the defendant’s sentence; the outcome could still change after further review.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Marshall said he would grant full review and set the case for argument. Justice Brennan said he would vacate the death sentence because he believes the death penalty is always unconstitutional.