work in earnest to reach a unanimous verdict so the case could be “completed.” Thus the jury, infected with the concept that absent unanimity a retrial would occur and troubled by its lack of unanimity, was never told the trial court would impose a life sentence in the event of deadlock. These facts, when combined with the trial court’s inartful responses to the first note from the jury and the jury’s request to return home for the evening, compel the conclusion the death sentences were coerced and require relief under Lowenfield. This is especially true given the heightened entitlement of a defendant facing the death penalty to an uncoerced verdict of the jury. Lowenfield, 484 U.S. at 241, 108 S.Ct. 546; Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419, 422, 115 S.Ct. 1555, 131 L.Ed.2d 490 (1995) (<HOLDING>). Failure to grant relief on this record would
holding that more than notice to a defendant is required holding cumulative error not reversible if it is more probably harmless than not recognizing that a strong causal connection is required quotation omitted holding a federal habeas courts duty to search for constitutional error with painstaking care is never more exacting than it is in a capital case quotation omitted holding that a federal habeas court performing a harmless error inquiry on collateral review must employ the standard for harmless error articulated in brecht even if the state courts have never reviewed the error on direct appeal