The Oyez Project Virtual Tour of the Supreme Court Building

Abstract

Argument: Monday, February 23, 1998
Decision: Monday, June 8, 1998
Issues: Criminal Procedure, Cruel and Unusual Punishment, Death Penalty

Advocates

Paula Hutchinson (Appointed by the U.S. Supreme Court, argued the cause for the respondent)
Roy W. McLeese (On behalf of the United States, as amicus curiae, supporting the petitioner)
Donald B. Stenberg (Argued the cause for the petitioner)

Facts of the Case

Randolph K. Reeves was charged with two counts of felony murder for the sexual assault and murder of Janet Mesner and Victoria Lamm, both of Lincoln, Nebraska. Under Nebraska law, felony murder is a form of first-degree murder committed in the perpetration of certain felonies, including sexual assault. A conviction for felony murder renders a defendant eligible for the death penalty; however the jury does not charge the defendant because capital sentencing is a judicial function. In his trial Reeves requested the jury be given other options rather than just felony murder. The trial court judge denied Reeves's motion and he was subsequently convicted on both counts. A three-judge panel sentenced Reeves to death. The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed his convictions and sentences. After exhausting his state remedies, Reeves filed a federal habeas corpus petition that the trial court's failure to give the requested instructions was unconstitutional. The District Court granted relief on an unrelated due process claim. The Court of Appeals rejected the lower court's decision, but held that a constitutional error had occurred.

Question

Does the Eighth Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment require jurors in capital cases to be given an option to convict a defendant of offenses that are not lesser-included offenses of the crime charged? Did the Nebraska trial court err in failing to give the requested jury instructions?

Conclusion

No and no. The Court held 8-1, in an opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas, that (1) in capital cases, a state trial court is not required, under the Constitution, to instruct the jury on offenses that are not lesser included offenses of the charged crime under state law; and (2) the Nebraska trial court did not commit federal constitutional error in failing to give the requested jury instructions as to second-degree murder and manslaughter.

Supreme Court Justice Opinions and Votes (by Ideology)

Sort by Seniority
(More information here)
Decision: 8 votes for Hopkins, Warden, 1 vote(s) against
Legal Provision: Due Process
Wrote a dissent
Stevens
Voted with the majority
Ginsburg
Voted with the majority
Breyer
Voted with the majority
Souter
Voted with the majority
Kennedy
Voted with the majority
O'Connor
Voted with the majority
Rehnquist
Voted with the majority
Scalia
Wrote the majority opinion
Thomas
Full Opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas

Cite this page

The Oyez Project, Hopkins, Warden v. Reeves, 524 U.S. 88 (1998),
available at: <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1997/1997_96_1693/>
(last visited ).