Syllabus

NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Syllabus

UNITED STATES v. TSARNAEV CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

No. 20–443. Argued October 13, 2021—Decided March 4, 2022 On April 15, 2013, brothers Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev planted and detonated two homemade pressure-cooker bombs near the finish line of the Boston Marathon, killing three and wounding hundreds. Three days later, as investigators began to close in, the brothers fled. In the process, they murdered a Massachusetts Institute of Technology campus police officer, carjacked a graduate student, and fought a street battle with police during which Dzhokhar inadvertently ran over and killed Tamerlan. Dzhokhar eventually abandoned the vehicle and hid in a covered boat being stored in a nearby backyard. He was arrested the following day. Dzhokhar was indicted for 30 crimes, including 17 capital offenses. To prepare for jury selection, the parties proposed a 100-question screening form, which included several questions regarding whether media coverage may have biased prospective jurors. The District Court declined to include a proposed question that asked each prospec- tive juror to list the facts he had learned about the case from the media and other sources. According to the District Court, the question was too “unfocused” and “unguided.” Following three weeks of in-person questioning, a jury was seated. The jury found Dzhokhar guilty on all counts, and the Government sought the death penalty. At sentencing, Dzhokhar sought mitigation based on the theory that Tamerlan had masterminded the bombing and pressured Dzhokhar to participate. In an attempt to show Tamerlan’s domineering nature, Dzhokhar sought to introduce the statements of Ibragim Todashev, who had alleged during an FBI interview that, years earlier, Tamerlan had participated in a triple homicide in Waltham, Massachusetts. The Government asked the trial court to exclude any reference to the Wal- 2 UNITED STATES v. TSARNAEV

Syllabus

tham murders on the grounds that the evidence either lacked rele- vance or, alternatively, lacked probative value and was likely to con- fuse the issues. The Government also pointed out that, because FBI agents had killed Todashev in self-defense after he attacked them dur- ing the interview, there were no living witnesses to the Waltham mur- ders. The District Court excluded the evidence, and the jury concluded that 6 of Dzhokhar’s crimes warranted the death penalty. The Court of Appeals vacated Dzhokhar’s capital sentences on two grounds. First, the court held that the District Court abused its dis- cretion during jury selection by declining to ask about the kind and degree of each prospective juror’s media exposure, as required by that court’s decision in Patriarca v. United States, 402 F. 2d 314. Second, the court held that the District Court abused its discretion during sen- tencing when it excluded evidence concerning Tamerlan’s possible in- volvement in the Waltham murders. Held: The Court of Appeals improperly vacated Dzhokhar’s capital sen- tences. Pp. 8–20. (a) The District Court did not abuse its discretion by declining to ask about the content and extent of each juror’s media consumption re- garding the bombings. Jury selection falls “particularly within the pr