Ronald Rompilla

Good news! The United States Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case of Ronald Rompilla of Pennsylvania. Rompilla alleges that his sentence should be vacated because the jury was not informed that if they gave Rompilla a life sentence, there would be no possibility of parole. As many of you know, this has been a common question in death penalty appeals lately. The US Supreme Court ruled on this question in 1994 (Simmons v. South Carolina), but the opinion came in the form of a plurality and there was no majority opinion on the reasoning behind the holding that Simmons sentence was unconstitutional. The Justices disagreed about when it was necessary for a court to inform the jury of the lack of a possibility of parole. The Court will now be given the chance to clarify the opinion. Its only been ten years, but there has been a change on the Court since the Simmons opinion was drafted. However, Justice Blackmun, the justice who retired, joined in a portion of the opinion which included four justices. It was also the more broad portion of the opinion. In theory, The Chief Justice, Justice Kennedy and Justice O'Connor will all vote similarly to how they did in Simmons. It is also assumed that Justices Scalia and Thomas will vote as they did in Simmons and find the sentencing constitutional. Justice Breyer is only new justice since Simmons and he is likely to vote as Blackmun did. The task of Rompilla's counsel will be to convince one of the other three (The Chief, Kennedy or O'Connor) that he or she should vote differently. O'Connor has expressed concern over the death penalty in the recent past (mostly issues with effectiveness of counsel), so perhaps she has reviewed her opinion on this issue as well. We shall see.

Supreme Court takes on Pa. death sentence