October Term 2006 · Docket 05-11304

Can Texas ignore mitigating evidence in death penalty cases?

Smith argues Texas ignored his mitigating evidence. Texas claims the jury considered it anyway.

Official caption
Smith v. Texas
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Steiker argued the prior ruling barred the jury from weighing Smith's evidence.

    Cruz argued two postulates govern the case.

    Schaerr argued for the state's position.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

Smith seeks a new trial. Texas wants to keep the death sentence.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on January 17, 2007.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Smith wants a new trial. He claims the jury ignored his mitigating evidence.

Texas wants to keep the sentence. It claims the jury considered the evidence.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Smith argues the jury instruction barred consideration of his mitigating evidence.

Texas argues the jury considered the evidence despite the instruction.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Souter asked if harmless error analysis applies here.

Justice Scalia asked if the jury actually considered the evidence.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines how juries weigh mitigating evidence in death penalty trials.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON