(1) Blood on his clothing
(2) Blood on the door of his house
(3) The defendant pleaded guilty to the murder, rape, and kidnapping of a 16 year old girl (whose throat was slashed twice with a box cutter).
Probably the rape provided additional evidence linking the defendant's DNA to the crime.
Ultimately, a liberal Sixth Court of Appeals was overturned by the US Supreme Court.
My opinion is that since the defendant pleaded guilty, and there was SIGNIFICANT evidence that the defendant was guilty of the crime because of blood, etc, that it was prudent for the lower courts to have ruled the way they did.
One does not want someone who might slash the throat of a guard or another inmate in prison for life. The death penalty is probably warranted in this case because of the violent nature of the defendant.
There is no reason for additional people to die.
I don’t know what’s wrong with the argument that pleading guilty waves your 5th amendment rights.
The standard is that a minor error that would not have influenced the trial outcome can be overlooked.
The mere omission of the admonishment to not to take the fact that he didn’t testify on his own behalf during the sentencing phase is a minor error imho, but it also was in all likelihood not in the Jurors minds at all.
However, Certiorari should have been denied as it wasn’t SCOTUS worthy, and granting Certiorari and then ruling against makes it all the more harder for somebody else to raise that issue - perhaps in a more applicable case.