Wainwright, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections v. Witt
469 U.S. 412 · No. 83-1427 · 1984 term · Burger Court
Decided Jan 21, 1985 · argued Oct 2, 1984
Criminal procedure · Extra-legal jury influences: jurors and death penalty
Majority opinion: William Rehnquist
The voteMajorityDissent
7–27 in the majority, 2 in dissent
2 dissents (7–2)
Reversed. Wainwright, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections won.
What this ruling means
Reversed: the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit, and its own ruling ends the case.
Wainwright, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections was the petitioner, the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the case. “Won” means the Court gave that side the result it asked for.
From the Supreme Court Database. A justice who agreed with the result but not the reasoning counts in the majority.
Summary
The opening of the case’s Wikipedia article: what the case was about and what the Court held.
Wainwright vs. Witt, 469 U.S. 412 (1985), was a U.S. Supreme Court case concerning a criminal defendant, Johnny Paul Witt, who argued that his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated when he was sentenced to death for first degree murder by the state of Florida. He argued that the trial court had unconstitutionally hand-picked a jury during the voir dire process. This was because certain people were excused from the jury because they admitted pre-trial, that their decision of guilty or not guilty toward capital punishment would be swayed due to personal or religious beliefs.
Data notes
The text is Wikipedia’s (CC BY-SA 4.0), matched to the case by its citation, docket number or name and year, and is not checked against the opinion. The site keeps the article’s opening section, ending on its last full sentence. The one-sentence summary under the title is the Decisions list’s: Wikipedia’s own ruling sentence, or, tagged “AI-written”, one Claude wrote from this opening.
How the justices voted
Each justice who took part, placed by their Martin–Quinn ideology score for the 1984 term. Filled: the 7 in the majority. Hollow: the 2 in dissent. Colour is the party of the president who appointed them.
Majority(7)
William RehnquistWrote the majority opinion
John StevensWrote a concurrence
Harry BlackmunJoined the majority
Lewis PowellJoined the majority
Byron WhiteJoined the majority
Sandra O'ConnorJoined the majority
Warren BurgerJoined the majority
Dissent(2)
William BrennanWrote a dissent
Thurgood MarshallJoined a dissent
Data notes
Each justice’s vote and what they wrote are from the justice-centered file of the Supreme Court Database. “Wrote a concurrence” means the justice sided with the majority and wrote separately; a justice who dissented in part is counted on the side they took overall. A justice who wrote nothing is listed as joining their side.
Positions are each justice’s Martin–Quinn score for the case’s term, the same scores as the Ideology page: negative is more liberal, positive more conservative. A score sums up a justice’s votes across the whole term, so it says where they usually sit, not why they voted as they did here. The median line is the Court’s median justice that term.
The parties
Who brought the case to the Court, who answered it, and how it got there.
- Petitioner
- Wainwright, Secretary, Florida Department of CorrectionsState (Florida)
- Respondent
- WittPerson convicted of crime
- Reached the Court by
- Certiorari (the Court chose to hear it)
- Why it was taken
- Federal courts were unsure how to apply the law
Data notes
The names are the two sides of the case’s title. The description under each is the Supreme Court Database’s category for that party, in its own wording. The petitioner is the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the decision below. “Why it was taken” appears only when the majority opinion says lower courts disagreed or were unsure about the question; reasons that would fit any case (“to resolve the question presented”, “an important question”) are left out.
The law at issue
The law the Court was asked to apply, and the kind of power it used to decide.
- Provision
- 28 U.S.C. § 2241-2255 (habeas corpus)
- Kind of law
- Federal Statute
- Decided by
- Federal common law; Statutory construction
Data notes
The Supreme Court Database codes the main constitutional provision, statute or court rule each case turned on, and the basis of the decision: judicial review of a federal or state law, interpreting a statute, supervising the lower courts, and so on. A case can rest on more than one. “Overruled” counts only where the majority opinion says so.
Timeline
What happened at the Court and how the case got there, newest first.
- Jan 21, 1985DecidedDecided · Decided 7–2: reversed. Wainwright, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections won.
- Oct 2, 1984ArguedArgued · Oral argument before the Court.
- Not datedTaken upTaken up · The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case (certiorari). Federal courts were unsure how to apply the law.
- Not datedCourt belowCourt below · Decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit: reversed.
- Not datedBeganBegan · The case began in the Florida Middle U.S. District Court.
Data notes
From the Supreme Court Database: the court the case began in, the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed and what that court did, how the case came to the Court, and the dates of argument and decision. The database does not date the steps in the lower courts. Court names are the database’s.
Other decisions on the same issue
14 other argued cases since 1946 on extra-legal jury influences: jurors and death penalty, newest first.
- United States v. Tsarnaev142 S. Ct. 1024Mar 4, 2022 · 142 S. Ct. 1024Criminal procedure6–36–3 band
- Flowers v. Mississippi139 S. Ct. 2228Jun 21, 2019 · 139 S. Ct. 2228Criminal procedure7–27–2 band
- Foster v. Chatman578 U.S. 488May 23, 2016 · 578 U.S. 488Criminal procedure7–18–1 band
- Jeffrey Uttecht, Superintendent, Washington State Penitentiary v. Cal Coburn Brown551 U.S. 1Jun 4, 2007 · 551 U.S. 1Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
- Derrick Morgan v. Illinois504 U.S. 719Jun 15, 1992 · 504 U.S. 719Criminal procedure6–36–3 band
- Ross v. Oklahoma487 U.S. 81Jun 22, 1988 · 487 U.S. 81Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
- Buchanan v. Kentucky483 U.S. 402Jun 24, 1987 · 483 U.S. 402Criminal procedure6–36–3 band
- Gray v. Mississippi481 U.S. 648May 18, 1987 · 481 U.S. 648Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
- Darden v. Wainwright, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections477 U.S. 168Jun 23, 1986 · 477 U.S. 168Criminal procedure5–45–4 band
- Lockhart, Director, Arkansas Department of Corrections v. McCree476 U.S. 162May 5, 1986 · 476 U.S. 162Criminal procedure6–36–3 band
- Adams v. Texas448 U.S. 38Jun 25, 1980 · 448 U.S. 38Criminal procedure8–18–1 band
- McGautha v. California402 U.S. 183May 3, 1971 · 402 U.S. 183Criminal procedure6–36–3 band
- Maxwell v. Bishop, Penitentiary Superintendent398 U.S. 262Jun 1, 1970 · 398 U.S. 262Criminal procedure6–18–1 band
- Witherspoon v. Illinois et al.Landmark · Capital punishment391 U.S. 510Jun 3, 1968 · 391 U.S. 510Criminal procedureLandmark · Capital punishment6–36–3 band
Data notes
Every other orally argued case with a clear vote, from the 1946 term on, that the Supreme Court Database files under the same issue as this one. The database gives each case one issue from a list of about 270 (abortion, search and seizure of vehicles, the death penalty, and so on), whatever law it turned on.
Official record
Read the full opinion on Justia, the argument audio on Oyez and Wikipedia. Case data from the Supreme Court Database, Version 2026 Release 01, through the 2025 term.