Is a capital defendant's offer to plead guilty and waive all post-trial procedures in exchange for a life sentence admissible as mitigating evidence?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED By compelling the Petitioner to undergo a pretrial psychological evaluation to rebut a mitigation claim it knew he was not making, and prohibiting him from presenting significant evidence of his acceptance of responsibility, the trial court violated his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and his Sixth Amendment right to present a defense, thereby violating his Eighth Amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment, all as protected by his rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. To secure those rights, Petitioner presents these two questions: 1. Is it possible that a jury might find some indication of character regarding willingness to accept responsibility — and thereby find some mitigating value — in a capital defendant’s offer to plead guilty, accept a sentence of life without the possibility of parole, and waive his right to direct appeal and any other post-conviction proceedings in exchange for the state’s dropping death specifications? And if so, does an absolute prohibition against telling the jury of that offer violate the Sixth and Eighth Amendments as made applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment? 2. Is the accused in a capital case entitled to investigate, develop, and introduce, as mitigating evidence for the penalty phase, expert testimony explaining the accused’s personal and childhood history without exposing himself to a compelled examination by the prosecution’s expert? If so, then any evidence obtained during that improperly compelled examination may not be used against the accused, all as required by the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. ii