Ex Parte Brandon Washington. (in Re Brandon Washington v. State of Alabama)

Summary

The court held that admitting victim-impact testimony containing characterizations of the defendant and crime and a recommendation of death was plain error and was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. It therefore reversed and remanded, while also explaining that the presentence report used on remand was inadequate because it omitted material information about Washington's family history, adolescence, and mental-health history. Justice Bolin, dissenting in part and concurring in the result, would not have reached the presentence-report issue because it was unlikely to recur after remand.