NCJ Number
43058
Journal
UNIVERSITY OF DETROIT JOURNAL OF UBAN LAW Volume: 54 Issue: 2 Dated: (WINTER 1977) Pages: 345-366
Date Published
1977
Length
22 pages
Annotation
THE PRINCIPLES UNDERLYING A SERIES OF SUPREME COURT DECISIONS ON THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT ARE EXAMINED AND THE EFFECT OF THESE DESISIONS ON STATE LAWS DISCUSSED.
Abstract
IN A SERIES OF DECISIONS LED BY GREGG V. GEORGIA, THE SUPREME COURT RULED THAT PUNISHMENT BY DEATH FOR SUCH SERIOUS CRIMES AS MURDER IS NOT UNCONSTITUTIONAL PER SE BUT THAT A LAW WHICH PROVIDES THE JUDGE OR JURY WITH A CHOICE BETWEEN PRISON OR DEATH WITHOUT PRESCRIBING GUIDELINES FOR MAKING SUCH A CHOICE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL (FURMAN VS GEORGIA). A LAW WHICH PROVIDES SUCH GUIDELINES AND ALSO REQUIRES CONSIDERATION OF AGGRAVATING FACTORS AND MITIGATING CONDITIONS IS CONSTITUTIONAL (JUREK VS TEXAS AND PROFIT V. FLORIDA) AN APPELLATE COURT CAN PROBE THESE SPECIFICATIONS TO DETERMINE IF THEY ARE SUFFICIENT TO ELIMINATE ARBITRARINESS ON THE PART OF JUDGE OR JURY. PUNISHMENT BY DEATH AS THE ONLY STATUTORY PENALTY IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL EVEN IF SUCH A MANDATORY DEATH SENTENCE LAW REQUIRES THE JUDGE OR JURY TO CONSIDER ALL EVIDENCE (ROBERTS V. LOUISIANA AND WOODSON V. NORTH CAROLINA). IN WRITING THESE OPINIONS THE COURT HAS UTILIZED HISTORY, TRADITION, CONTEMPORARY STANDARDS OF DECENCY, AND RESPECT FOR HUMAN DIGNITY WITH EMPHASIS ON DECENCY AND DIGNITY. THE MORAL ISSUE OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT HAS BEEN LEFT UNRESOLVED. EACH CASE IS CONSIDERED IN DETAIL. FOOTNOTES CITE HISTORICAL PRECEDENTS AND INTERPRETATIONS.