Johnny Paul Penry, Petitioner-appellant, v. James A. Lynaugh, Interim Director, Texas Department Ofcorrections, Respondent-appellee, 882 F.2d 141 (5th Cir. 1989)
Annotate this CaseCurtis C. Mason, Staff Counsel for Inmates, Texas Dept. of Corr., Huntsville, Tex., for petitioner-appellant.
Paula C. Offenhauser, Asst. Atty. Gen., Austin, Tex., for respondent-appellee.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas; William M. Steger, Judge.
ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Before REAVLEY and GARWOOD, Circuit Judges.*
PER CURIAM:
The Supreme Court has concluded that the jury was not provided with a vehicle for responding to the mitigating evidence of Penry's mental retardation and abused background, and the Court has ordered that Penry be resentenced. Penry v. Lynaugh, --- U.S. ----, 109 S. Ct. 2934, 106 L. Ed. 2d 256 (1989).
Accordingly, the district court's judgment denying the writ is reversed, and the cause is remanded to that court for an order complying with the directions of the Supreme Court.
Acting as a panel quorum as in original decision at 832 F.2d 915
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
