The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to hear a death row appeal from a Pennsylvania man who maintains that jurors at his trial should have been told that they had the option of sentencing him to life without parole instead of the death penalty. According to the brief filed on behalf of Ronald Rompilla, the jury asked several questions during his trial about Rompilla’s “future dangerousness,” yet were never told that if sentenced to prison he would never be eligible for later release. The jury then sentenced him to death. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3d Circuit ruled that jurors did not have to be given a special instruction. Rompilla was convicted of murder during a 1988 robbery in Allentown.

Rompilla also alleges that his public defenders presented inadequate evidence of his mental retardation and traumatic upbringing.

Most death penalty states offer life without parole, but only Pennsylvania and South Carolina have routinely declined to tell jurors that a defendant will not be released if sent to prison, according to Rompilla’s brief. (Rompilla v. Beard, 04-5462, Associated Press, Sept. 28, 2004). See Life Without Parole; see also Supreme Court.