A jury’s question, brushed aside as insignificant by the chief justice of the United States, might have made a life-or-death difference, according to a study that challenged the chief justice’s assumptions with mock jurors. A Cornell University law professor, Stephen Garvey, undertook a study of a jury instruction in the penalty phase of the 1993 trial of Virginia cop-killer Lonnie Weeks Jr., who faces execution on March 16.

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote in a Jan. 19 opinion denying Weeks’ petition for habeas corpus that there was only a “slight possibility” that jurors had been confused by the trial judge’s instructions.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]