SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
503 U.S. 159
Dawson v. Delaware
No. 90-6704
Argued: Nov. 12, 1991 ---
Decided: March 9, 1992
A Delaware jury convicted
petitioner Dawson of first-degree murder and other crimes. At the
penalty hearing, the prosecution, inter alia, read a
stipulation --
[t]he Aryan Brotherhood refers
to a white racist prison gang that began . . . in California in
response to other gangs of racial minorities. Separate gangs calling
themselves the Aryan Brotherhood now exist in many state prisons
including Delaware
-- despite Dawson's assertion that
the admission of the stipulated facts violated his First and
Fourteenth Amendment rights, and introduced evidence that he had the
words "Aryan Brotherhood" tattooed on his hand. The jury found that
the aggravating circumstances -- that the murder was committed by an
escaped prisoner, during the commission of a burglary, and for
pecuniary gain -- outweighed Dawson's mitigating evidence -- that he
had shown kindness to family members and had earned good time credits
in prison -- and made a binding recommendation to the court that he be
sentenced to death. The State Supreme Court affirmed.
Held:
1. Dawson's First and Fourteenth
Amendment rights were violated by the admission of the Aryan
Brotherhood evidence in this case, because the evidence had no
relevance to the issues being decided in the proceeding. The
Constitution does not erect a per se barrier to the admission
of evidence concerning one's beliefs and associations at sentencing
simply because those beliefs and associations are protected by the
First Amendment. See, e.g., Barclay v. Florida, 463 U.S. 939.
However, the narrowness of the stipulation admitted here left the
evidence totally without relevance to the sentencing proceeding. The
stipulation says nothing about the beliefs of the Delaware prison's
chapter of the Aryan Brotherhood. Any racist beliefs the group might
hold were not tied in any way to the murder, because Dawson's victim
was white, as is Dawson. The evidence proved only the group's and
Dawson's abstract beliefs, not that the group had committed or
endorsed any unlawful or violent acts. Thus, it was not relevant to
help prove any aggravating circumstance. Cf. Texas v. Johnson,
491 U.S. 397, 414. Nor was the evidence relevant to rebut any
mitigating evidence, since, while the State was entitled to introduce
"bad" character evidence to rebut Dawson's "good" character evidence,
see Payne v. Tennessee, 501 [p160] U.S.
808, 825, the Aryan Brotherhood evidence cannot be viewed as relevant
"bad" character evidence in its own right. Pp. 163-168.
2. The question whether the
wrongful admission of the Aryan Brotherhood evidence was harmless
error is left open for consideration by the State Supreme Court on
remand. P. 168-169.
REHNQUIST, C.J., delivered the
opinion of the Court, in which WHITE, BLACKMUN, STEVENS, O'CONNOR,
SCALIA, KENNEDY, and SOUTER, JJ., joined. BLACKMUN, J., filed a
concurring opinion. THOMAS, J., filed a dissenting opinion. |