Allegations that the trial judge and a prosecutor in his 1990 trial were in a long-term intimate relationship did not win death row inmate Charles Dean Hood state habeas relief before the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. But on Feb. 24, Hood did prevail in a subsequent habeas petition also filed with the CCA, this time arguing that the jury that heard his case was not fully informed about the extent of his mental retardation when it considered his punishment.
In a split decision, the CCA held in Ex Parte Charles Dean Hood that Hood should receive a new punishment trial. The majority came to that conclusion after examining the Penry line of decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court — a series of opinions that requires jurors to be informed about the mental retardation of a defendant as a mitigating factor in determining his punishment.
