McKinney v. Arizona

This case asked how Arizona had to fix a death sentence after a federal habeas court said the state failed to properly consider James McKinney's mitigating evidence, including PTSD. The Supreme Court said an appellate court may correct that kind of error by reweighing the aggravating and mitigating evidence, instead of automatically ordering a new jury sentencing proceeding.

The Court decided that appellate reweighing is a permissible way to correct this Eddings error. The prompt does not provide the vote count or opinion lineup.

The decision affects how states can fix sentencing mistakes in death penalty cases. For example, a state supreme court may be able to redo the weighing itself rather than send the case back for a full new sentencing hearing.

The Supreme Court has finished this case. Any further proceedings would take place in Arizona courts under the rule the Court announced.

The dispute was over how Arizona had to correct a sentencing error after courts failed to properly consider McKinney's mitigating evidence. The key question was whether appellate judges could reweigh the evidence themselves.

It affects other death penalty cases where a court later finds a sentencing mistake. States may use appellate reweighing instead of always starting a new sentencing proceeding.

The Supreme Court's review is over. Any remaining action would happen in Arizona courts following the Court's decision.