0 0
Supreme Court of the United States - 428 U.S. 153
Tags: Criminal law, Death penalty
The legal case examines whether the death penalty for murder in Georgia violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The court rules that the death penalty is not always unconstitutional, but it must not involve unnecessary pain and must be proportionate to the severity of the crime. The decision to impose the death penalty must be based on the circumstances of the offense and the characteristics of the offender. A well-crafted statute that provides guidance to the sentencing authority can address concerns regarding arbitrary or capricious imposition of the death penalty. Georgia's new sentencing procedures require specific jury findings before imposing the death penalty, and the Supreme Court of Georgia compares each death sentence with those imposed on similarly situated defendants to ensure proportionality.
The case concerns the constitutionality of Georgia's death penalty statute, which allows for a sentence of death or life imprisonment if the jury unanimously finds at least one of eight aggravating circumstances. The Georgia Supreme Court reviews every death penalty case to ensure no influence of passion or prejudice, evidence supports the finding of an aggravating circumstance, and the sentence is not excessive. The petitioner, Troy Gregg, was convicted of murdering two men during a robbery and sentenced to death. The trial judge refused to submit the lesser included offense of manslaughter to the jury. The prosecutor emphasized the strength of the case and the defense suggested the possibility of a mistake during the sentencing proceeding. The judge instructed the jury on their sentencing function and submitted three statutory aggravating circumstances.
The judge agrees with the decision made in this case, but disagrees with a similar case from 1972. Other judges also disagreed with the 1972 case.
Justice Brennan's dissenting opinion in a death penalty case argues that the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause should be interpreted based on evolving societal standards of decency, with a focus on the essence of the death penalty itself rather than just the procedures used to impose it. The controversy surrounding the death penalty in the US is rooted in moral arguments and the conflict between retribution and vengeance versus the democratic movement's emphasis on individual dignity. The Clause reflects moral principles that limit the types of punishments that can be imposed, and the evolution of moral concepts and standards of decency have shaped the progress of the law.
Justice Marshall dissents from the majority's decision that the death penalty is constitutional under the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause. He argues that the death penalty is excessive and morally unacceptable, and that its constitutionality should not be based solely on the opinion of the public. He notes that the only legitimate purposes for the death penalty are general deterrence and retribution, but the available evidence does not support a correlation between the existence of capital punishment and lower rates of capital crime. He briefly discusses the significance of a scientific study that suggests a deterrent effect of the death penalty, but notes that critics have raised concerns about the study's methods and conclusions.
LSD+ gives you access to over 50,000 case briefs, more than anyone else. Be the first to email us the website of a case brief product that offers you more case briefs and we'll give you a free year of LSD+.
Unlimited access. Read as much content as you want during your trial with no device limitations. Cancel any time during your trial and keep access for the full 14 days.
Lawyers and judges love to use big words. And Latin, for some reason.
Highlight a legal term in LSD Briefs and get an instant, plain English definition. Try highlighting contract or specific performance. No need to search or read through a list of definitions, simply highlight the words you don’t know and our LSDefine integration will instantly give you a definition to any of over 30,000 legal terms.
DeepDive allows you to explore legal cases like never before. DeepDive offers multiple levels of case summaries, which empowers you to quickly and easily find the information you need to stay on top of readings. Easily navigate through summary levels and click on any text to get more detail, all the way down to the original legal case text.
Our proprietary state-of-the-art system can instantly brief over 6,000,000 US cases. That means we can probably brief that case that your professor assigned last night when she sent you a poorly scanned pdf and told you to read every third paragraph. Or maybe she uploaded it to Canvas and didn’t really tell you to read it, but you know you probably should. Tenure does wild things to good people.
Study groups are a great way to learn and explore a case. LSD has chat rooms for each case to let you ask questions across the community and hear what other students struggled with and how they put it all together. Learn the key points of every case from other LSD+ users and share your knowledge with LSD High Points.
Don’t settle for mistakes in briefs that have been there for 10 years and never fixed. Find an issue or something missing from a brief? Down vote and we will make improvements. All of our case brief editors graduated from from T14 law schools.