in the weighing process creates the possibility of randomness by placing a thumb on death’s side of the scale, thus creating the risk of treating the defendant as more deserving of the death penalty” (internal quotation marks, citations, and alterations omitted)). Second, consider why that error could affect a decision to impose death. . If the error causes harm, it is because a jury has given special weight to its finding of (or the evidence that shows) the invalid “aggravating factor.” The jury might do so because the judge or prosecutor led it to believe that state law attaches particular importance to that factor: Indeed, why else would the State call that factor an “aggravator” and/or permit it to render a defendant death eligible? See Zant v. Stephens, 462 U. S. 862, 888 (1983) (<HOLDING>); see also ante, at 226 (Stevens, J.,
recognizing that statutory label arguably might have caused the jury to give somewhat greater weight to respondents prior criminal record than it otherwise would have given holding the question of whether an accomplice is credible and the weight to be given to the testimony are issues for the jury to determine holding unenforceable a regulation that would have provided greater workers compensation benefits than permitted by statute holding that the state must establish by the greater weight of the evidence that a defendant violated a term of his probation holding that the jury is the judge of the weight and credibility given to witness testimony