This decision is important in that it provides guidance on the scope of information regarding appellate review that may be provided to a jury. The principles announced by the Court are amply supported by the Court's historical concern for reliability in capital sentencing procedures. The Court, however, may not have properly applied those principles because it is not clear that the prosecutor in the case led the jury to believe it did not have ultimate sentencing responsibility. Further, the Court's suggestion that even accurate references to appellate review are improper may be questioned if jurors harbor misconceptions as to the nature of appellate review. However, if such misconceptions are not widespread, the Court's decision should enhance the reliability of capital sentencing determinations by reducing the risk that any reference to appellate review may diminish the jury's sense of responsibility. 94 notes.