O'Dell v. Netherland, 521 U.S. 151 (1997), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that the rule of Simmons v. South Carolina, that a capital defendant has the right to have their jury informed of their parole ineligibility where their future dangerousness is put at issue, does not apply retroactively to cases on federal habeas corpus review.[1]

O'Dell v. Netherland
Argued March 18, 1997
Decided June 19, 1997
Full case nameJoseph Roger O'Dell, III, Petitioner, v. J.D. Netherland, Warden, Mecklenburg Correctional Center, et al., Respondents.
Docket no.96-6867
Citations521 U.S. 151 (more)
117 S. Ct. 1969; 138 L. Ed. 2d 351; 65 U.S.L.W. 4506
Case history
PriorConvictions and sentences upheld, O'Dell v. Commonwealth, 234 Va. 672, 364 S.E.2d 491 (1988); affirmed on rehearing, Record No. 861219 (Va., April 1, 1988); cert. denied, O'Dell v. Virginia, 488 U.S. 871 (1988); rehearing denied, 488 U.S. 977 (1988); habeas corpus denied (Va. Cir., City of Virginia Beach, November 26, 1990); petition for appeal dismissed (Va., April 1, 1991); rehearing denied (Va., June 7, 1991); cert. denied, O'Dell v. Thompson, 502 U.S. 995 (1991); habeas corpus granted in part, denied in part (E.D. Va., September 6, 1994); reversed in part, affirmed in part, O'Dell v. Netherland, 95 F.3d 1214 (4th Cir. 1996); stay granted, 519 U.S. 1049 (1996) (Rehnquist, C.J., in chambers); cert. granted in part, 519 U.S. 1050 (1996).
Holding
Simmons v. South Carolina does not apply retroactively to cases on federal habeas corpus review.
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy
David Souter · Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg · Stephen Breyer
Case opinions
MajorityThomas, joined by Rehnquist, O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy
DissentStevens, joined by Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. XIV

References

edit
  1. ^ O'Dell v. Netherland, 521 U.S. 151 (1997).
edit