In the case of Jones, Superintendent, Missouri Training Center for Men at Moberly v. Thomas in 1988, the United States Supreme Court addressed a habeas corpus petition from an inmate who claimed his constitutional rights were violated during sentencing. The petitioner argued that he was not allowed to present mitigating evidence about his character and background during the penalty phase of his trial for capital murder. The court ruled against him on procedural grounds; it held that because he had failed to raise this issue in state court before bringing it to federal court as required by law, they could not consider its merits. This decision underscored the importance of exhausting all available state remedies before seeking relief in federal courts under habeas corpus proceedings.

In the dissenting opinion for Jones v. Thomas, Justice Scalia disagreed with the majority's decision to grant habeas corpus relief on grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel. He argued that there was no constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel at sentencing in a noncapital case and thus, it should not be considered as a basis for granting federal habeas corpus relief. Additionally, he contended that even if such a right existed, the defendant failed to demonstrate prejudice resulting from his attorney’s performance during sentencing. The justice also criticized the majority's reliance on an earlier ruling (Strickland v Washington), stating it was misapplied in this context because Strickland dealt with capital cases where death penalty is involved while this case did not involve death penalty.