On June 27, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear argu­ments in White v. Woodall, a death penal­ty case from Kentucky, to be heard dur­ing the Court’s next term. Robert Woodall plead­ed guilty to cap­i­tal mur­der and chose not to tes­ti­fy in the sen­tenc­ing phase of his tri­al. His attor­neys request­ed that the judge instruct the jury not to draw any adverse infer­ences from Woodall’s deci­sion not to tes­ti­fy on his own behalf, but the request was denied because the judge con­clud­ed that Woodall’s guilty plea waived his right to be free from self-incrim­i­na­tion. Woodall was sen­tenced to death. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ordered a resen­tenc­ing, hold­ing, ​“The due process clause requires that a tri­al court, if request­ed by the defen­dant, instruct the jury dur­ing the penal­ty phase of a cap­i­tal tri­al that no adverse infer­ence may be drawn from a defen­dan­t’s deci­sion not to tes­ti­fy.” Kentucky has chal­lenged that deci­sion and the Supreme Court grant­ed cer­tio­rari to review the matter.

(J. Belczyk, ​“Supreme Court issues final orders of term,” The Jurist, June 27, 2013.) See Supreme Court; lis­ten to DPIC’s pod­cast on the Supreme Court and the death penalty.

Citation Guide