Patillo v. Georgia

Background

A man convicted of malice murder of a teenage woman was sentenced to death. At the sentencing hearing, the state's only witness was a prisoner named David Chatman. Chatman told the jury that the defendant had expressed hatred of women and violent revenge. After the sentence, Chatman sent letters saying he had been promised that his probation would be reinstated if he testified, and he threatened to withdraw his story if the State did not honor the promise. Prosecutors later told the defendant's lawyer that they would inform the judge who had revoked Chatman's probation of his cooperation, but had not promised to recommend reinstatement.

Reasoning

The central question was whether the prosecutors’ failure to disclose the promise to Chatman required overturning the death sentence. The Georgia Supreme Court found that the nondisclosure was an error under Giglio, which requires telling defense teams about deals with witnesses, but called it harmless error. The U.S. Supreme Court denied review. Two Justices dissented and said the error might have affected the sentencing and that the high harmlessness standard in recent cases was not clearly met.

Real world impact

The immediate result is that the death sentence remains in place while the denial of review stands. The decision leaves open whether lower courts properly applied the strict harmless-error test in capital cases. Because the ruling is a denial of review, it is not a final ruling on guilt or on whether the nondisclosure was truly harmless and could be reconsidered in future proceedings.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Marshall would have granted review and vacated the sentence, focusing on the undisclosed deal and recent harmless-error standards; Justice Brennan reiterated that he opposes the death penalty in all cases.