Page:United States Reports, Volume 542.djvu/387

348

No. 03–526.

(a) A "new rule" resulting from a decision of this Court applies to convictions that are already ﬁnal only in limited circumstances. New substantive rules generally apply retroactively, but new procedural rules generally do not—only "'watershed rules of criminal procedure' implicating the fundamental fairness and accuracy of the criminal proceeding" are given retroactive effect. Saffle v. Parks,, 495. Such a rule must be one "without which the likelihood of an accurate conviction is seriously diminished." Teague v. Lane,, 313. Pp. 351–353.

(b) Ring ' s holding is properly classified as procedural. It did not alter the range of conduct or the class of persons subject to the death penalty in Arizona, but only the method of determining whether the defendant engaged in that conduct. Pp. 353–355.

(c) Ring did not announce a watershed rule of criminal procedure. This Court cannot conﬁdently say that judicial factﬁnding seriously diminishes accuracy. Pp. 355–358.

341 F. 3d 1082, reversed and remanded.

, delivered the opinion of the Court, in which and  and, joined. ,