Capital Punishment
...recommended by the jury. However, this practice was ruled unconstitutional because defendants were encouraged to forfeit their right to a jury trial, making sure they wouldn’t receive a death sentence. The other 1968 case was Witherspoon v. Illinois. In this case, the Supreme Court held that a potential juror’s thoughts and beliefs about the death penalty were no grounds to prevent that person from serving on the jury in a death penalty case. The only way jurors could be disqualified was if prosecutors could show that the juror’s attitude toward capital punishment would prevent him or her from making a fair decision about the punishment. The role of jurors had been getting a lot of attention in the Supreme Court. In 1971, the Court again addressed problems associated with their roles and discretion in capital cases. The Court decided Crampton v. Ohio and McGautha v. California. The defendants made an argument that it was a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment right to due process for jurors to have unrestricted discretion when deciding whether the defendants should live or die. They argued that such discretion resulted in arbitrary and capricious sentencing. The Court rejected these claims, approving of unfettered jury discretion and one proceeding to determine guilt or innocence and the sentence. It was stated that guiding capital sentencing discretion was “beyond present human ability.”(deathpenaltyinfo.org) Arbitrariness, as defined by Webster’s Dictionary, is “the basis on one’s preference, notion, or whim,”(Webster’s New World Dictionary) was brought before the Supreme Court in 1972 in Furman v. Georgia where Furman argued that capital cases resulted in arbitrary and capricious sentencing. Furman was a challenge brought under the Eighth Amendment. The Supreme Court set the standard that a punishment would be cruel and unusual if it was too severe for the crime, if it was arbitrary, if it offended society’s sense of justice, or if it was not more effective than a less severe penalty. In 9 opinions and by a vote of 5 to 4, the Court held that Georgia’s death penalty statute, which gave the jury complete sentencing discretion, could result in arbitrary sentencing. The Court held that this scheme of punishment under the statute was cruel and unusual and violated the Eighth Amendment. Thus, on June 29, 1972, the Supreme Court voided 40 death penalty statutes, changing the sentences of 629 death row inmates around the country and suspending the death penalty. Even though separate opinions stated that the death penalty itself was unconstitutional, the holding in Furman v. Georgia was that the specific death penalty statutes were unconstitutional. With that holding, the Court allowed states to rewrite their death penalty statutes as long as they eliminated the problems cited in Furman v. Georgia. New capital punishment statutes were proposed what would end arbitrariness in capital sentencing. Many states enacted their death penalty statutes. In order to end the unconstitutional flaws in statutes, some states removed the discretion by mandating capital punishment for those convicted of capital punishment. However, this practice was ruled unconstitutional. Death penalty statutes were still void. In order to reinstate the death penalty statutes, other states tried to limit that discretion by providing sentencing guidelines for the judge and jury when deciding whether or not to impose death. The guidelines allowed for the introduction of aggravating and mitigating factors in determining sentencing. These statutes were approved therefore reinstating the death penalty in those states. The Court also held that the death penalty itself was constitutional under the Eighth Amendment. Shortly after the reinstatement of the death penalty, many issues arose, mostly human rights issues, causing limitations within the United States. The first was that death is an unconstitutional punishment for the rape of an adult woman when the victim was not killed. Other limits to the death penalty followed. One limit to the death penalty is the execution of people who are mentally ill or mentally retarded. For a while, the execution of insane persons and retarded persons who committed capital crimes was banned. However, it was ruled that the execution of a person with mental retardation is not a violation of the Eighth Amendment. Mental retardation would be a mitigating factor to be considered during sentencing, however. Another limitation to the death penalty is race. Many arguments have been struck on the issue of racial discrimination in the death penalty. One argument pertained to the jury and selection of the jury. “A prosecutor who strikes a disproportionate number of citizens of the same race in selecting a jury is required to rebut the inference of discrimination by showing neutral reason for the strikes.”(deathpenaltyinfo.org) Another race argument that was raised was that there was racial discrimination in the application of the death penalty. A statistical analysis showing a pattern of racial disparities in death sentences based on the race of the victim was presented. The Supreme Court, however, held that the racial disparities wouldn’t be recognized as a violation to the constitution unless intentional racial discrimination against the defendant could be shown. Another death penalty limitation was the execution of juvenile offenders. Justices held a few opinions. One was that the execution of offenders of the age of 15 or younger is constitutional. Another was that states without a specific minimum age limit in their statute couldn’t execute juveniles. The combined opinions created the effect that no state without a minimum age limit in its death penalty statute can execute anyone who is under the age of 16 at the time of the crime. The Eighth Amendment does not prohibit the death penalty for crimes committed at age 16 or 17. Since there is such a big debate about the de...