Should the Court recalibrate the frameworks for judging the prejudice or harm of capital sentencing errors in jurisdictions where the factfinder may decline to impose a sentence of death without restriction, for example even if aggravating circumstances outweigh mitigating circumstances?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Should the Court recalibrate the frameworks for judging the prejudice or harm of capital sentencing errors in jurisdictions where the factfinder may decline to impose a sentence of death without restriction, for example even if aggravating circumstances outweigh mitigating circumstances? 2. Should the Court clarify its Lockett v. Ohio, 438 U.S. 586 (1978)-and-progeny jurisprudence and lay to rest the persistent misperception that mitigating evidence must connect to the crime or its aggravating circumstances? il