502ORD$$1I 02-10-99 16:45:48 PGT•ORD1BV (Bound Volume)
ORDERS 502 U. S.
1017
December 16, 1991
No. 91–6350. White v. United States. C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 941 F. 2d 1208. No. 91–6369. Wilson v. United States. Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 592 A. 2d 1009. No. 91–6393. Ingram v. United States. Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 592 A. 2d 992. No. 91–6399. Williams v. United States. C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 942 F. 2d 795. No. 91–6408. Bates v. United States. C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 943 F. 2d 383. No. 91–6450. Weeks v. Kentucky. Ct. App. Ky. Certiorari denied. No. 90–7347. Smith v. United States. C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied. Justice Thomas took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition. Reported below: 919 F. 2d 734. Opinion of Justice Stevens, respecting the denial of the petition for writ of certiorari. For the reasons stated in Justice Blackmun’s dissenting opinion, there is no escape from the conclusion that the Court of Appeals committed error in this case. I write only to note that I find it difficult to articulate an acceptable theory of discretionary review that would explain both the Court’s denial of certiorari in this case and its summary reversal in Mireles v. Waco, ante, p. 9 (per curiam), and Hunter v. Bryant, ante, p. 224 (per curiam). Justice Blackmun, with whom Justice O’Connor and Justice Souter join, dissenting. Petitioner Roy Smith claims that the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed his conviction in a manner inconsistent with this Court’s precedents on the application of harmless-error analysis. I agree. I would grant the petition, summarily vacate the judgment, and remand the case to the Court of Appeals. Petitioner and a codefendant, Slade Miller, were tried jointly for federal murder and conspiracy to commit murder, in violation of 18 U. S. C. §§ 1111 and 1117, on charges arising from the killing of a fellow inmate at Lorton Reformatory in Virginia. The Government’s case relied in significant part on the testimony of Cor-
