[go: nahoru, domu]

Jump to content

Furman v. Georgia: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
 
(499 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{short description|1972 U.S. Supreme Court case declaring arbitrary use of the death penalty unconstitutional}}
{{citations missing|date=December 2007}}
{{Use American English|date=May 2023}}
{{SCOTUSCase
{{Use mdy dates|date=May 2023}}
{{Infobox SCOTUS case
|Litigants=Furman v. Georgia
|Litigants=Furman v. Georgia
|ArgueDate=January 17
|ArgueDate=January 17
|ArgueYear=1971
|ArgueYear=1972
|DecideDate=June 29
|DecideDate=June 29
|DecideYear=1972
|DecideYear=1972
|FullName=William Henry Furman [[Versus|v.]] State of [[Georgia (U.S. state)|Georgia]]
|FullName=William Henry Furman v. State of [[Georgia (U.S. state)|Georgia]]
|USVol=408
|USVol=408
|USPage=238
|USPage=238
|Citation=92 S. Ct. 2726; 33 L. Ed. 2d 346; 1972 U.S. [[LexisNexis|LEXIS]] 169
|ParallelCitations=92 S. Ct. 2726; 33 [[Lawyers' Edition|L. Ed. 2d]] 346; 1972 [[LexisNexis|U.S. LEXIS]] 169
|Prior=[[Certiorari]] granted (403 U.S. 952)
|Prior=[[Certiorari|Cert.]] granted, {{ussc|403|952|el=no}}.
|Subsequent=Rehearing denied (409 U.S. 902)
|Subsequent=Rehearing denied, {{ussc|409|902|el=no}}.
|Holding=The arbitrary and inconsistent imposition of the death penalty violates the [[Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Eighth]] and [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth]] Amendments, and constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.
|Holding=The arbitrary and inconsistent imposition of the death penalty violates the [[Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Eighth]] and [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth]] Amendments, and constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.
|PerCuriam= Yes
|SCOTUS=1972-1975
|Majority= none
|Concurrence=Douglas
|Concurrence=Douglas
|Concurrence2=Brennan
|Concurrence2=Brennan
Line 21: Line 22:
|Concurrence5=Marshall
|Concurrence5=Marshall
|Dissent=Burger
|Dissent=Burger
|JoinDissent=Blackmun, Powell, Rehnquist
|JoinDissent=Blackmun, Powell, Rehnquist
|Dissent2=Blackmun
|Dissent2=Blackmun
|Dissent3=Powell
|Dissent3=Powell
Line 28: Line 29:
|JoinDissent4=Burger, Blackmun, Powell
|JoinDissent4=Burger, Blackmun, Powell
|LawsApplied=[[Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution|U.S. Const. amends. VIII]], [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|XIV]]
|LawsApplied=[[Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution|U.S. Const. amends. VIII]], [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|XIV]]
| Abrogated = ''[[Gregg v. Georgia]]'' (1976)
}}
}}
{{Wikisource}}
{{Wikisource}}

'''''Furman v. Georgia''''', {{ussc|408|238|1972}} was a [[United States Supreme Court]] decision that ruled on the requirement for a degree of consistency in the application of the [[capital punishment in the United States|death penalty]]. The Court consolidated ''[[Jackson v. Georgia]]'' and ''[[Branch v. Texas]]'' with the ''Furman'' decision, and thus also invalidated the death penalty for [[rape]]. The court had also intended to include the case of ''[[Aikens v. California]]'', but between the time ''Aikens'' had been heard in oral argument and a decision was to be issued, the [[Supreme Court of California]] decided in ''[[California v. Anderson]]'' that the death penalty violated the state constitution, thus the ''Aikens'' case was dismissed as moot since all death cases in California were overturned.
'''''Furman v. Georgia''''', 408 U.S. 238 (1972), was a landmark [[criminal case]] in which the [[United States Supreme Court]] decided that arbitrary and inconsistent imposition of the death penalty violates the [[Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Eighth]] and [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth]] Amendments, and constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. It was a [[per curiam]] decision. Five justices each wrote separately in support of the decision .<ref name=CL>{{cite book |title=Criminal Law – Cases and Materials |edition=7th |year=2012 |publisher=[[Wolters Kluwer Law & Business]] |author1-link=John Kaplan (law professor) |first1=John |last1=Kaplan |author2-link=Robert Weisberg |first2=Robert |last2=Weisberg |author3-link=Guyora Binder |first3=Guyora |last3=Binder |isbn=978-1-4548-0698-1 |url=https://law.stanford.edu/publications/criminal-law-cases-and-materials-7th-edition/}}</ref>{{rp|467–68}} Although the justices didn’t rule that the death penalty was unconstitutional, the ''Furman'' decision invalidated the death sentences of nearly 700 people.

The decision mandated a degree of consistency in the application of the death penalty. This case resulted in a ''[[de facto]]'' [[moratorium (law)|moratorium]] of [[capital punishment]] throughout the United States. Dozens of states rewrote their death penalty laws, most of which were upheld in the 1976 case ''[[Gregg v. Georgia]]''.<ref>{{cite news |last=Bellware |first=Kim |title=Death penalty’s 50-year rise and fall since Supreme Court struck it down |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2022/07/06/furman-georgia-supreme-co |work=The Washington Post |date=July 6, 2022}}</ref>
The Supreme Court consolidated the cases '''''Jackson v. Georgia''''' and '''''Branch v. Texas''''' with the ''Furman'' decision, thereby invalidating the death penalty for [[rape]]; this ruling was confirmed post-''Gregg'' in ''[[Coker v. Georgia]]''. The Court had also intended to include the case of ''[[Aikens v. California]]'', but between the time ''Aikens'' had been heard in oral argument and a decision was to be issued, the [[Supreme Court of California]] decided in ''[[California v. Anderson]]'' that the death penalty violated the state constitution; ''Aikens'' was therefore dismissed as [[Mootness|moot]], since this decision reduced all death sentences in California to [[life imprisonment]].<ref>{{Cite web|title=Furman v. Georgia (1972)|url=https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/furman_v_georgia_(1972)|access-date=May 18, 2021|website=LII / Legal Information Institute|publisher=Cornell Law School|language=en}}</ref>


==Background==
==Background==
The death penalty used to be a mandatory sentence for murder but by the 1970s most states had given juries complete discretion in deciding who should be executed and who should be sent to prison. Defense attorneys challenged death sentences on the grounds that jury discretion in capital cases resulted in arbitrary sentences being imposed in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth amendments. In '' [[McGautha v. California]]'', decided thirteen months before ''Furman'', the Burger Court held that absolute jury discretion in capital sentencing did not violate the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. Justices Douglas, Brennan and Marshall dissented. '' McGautha'' left unresolved similar challenges under the Eighth Amendment.<ref name=Kirchmeier_chapter7>Kirchmeier, Jeffrey L., 'Into the Courthouse: The 1970s Abolition Strategy', in *Imprisoned by the Past: Warren McCleskey and the American Death Penalty* (New York, 2015)</ref>


==Case history==
In the ''Furman ''case, the victim awoke in the middle of the night to find [[William Henry Furman]] [[burglary|burgling]] his house. At trial, in an unsworn statement allowed under Georgia criminal procedure, Furman said that while trying to escape, he tripped and the weapon he was carrying fired accidentally, killing the victim. This contradicted his prior statement to police that he had turned and blindly fired a shot while fleeing. In either event, because the shooting occurred during the commission of a felony, Furman would have been guilty of murder and eligible for the death penalty under then-extant state law. Furman was tried for murder and was found guilty based largely on his own statement. He was sentenced to death. He was killed the very next day and then his body was burned by his muslim family.
In the ''Furman v. Georgia'' case, William Micke awoke in the middle of the night to find [[William Henry Furman]] committing [[burglary]] in his house. At trial, in an unsworn statement allowed by Georgia criminal procedure, Furman said that while trying to escape, he tripped and the weapon he was carrying fired accidentally, killing the victim. This contradicted his prior statement to police that he had turned and fired a shot blindly while fleeing. In either event, because the shooting occurred during the commission of a felony, Furman would have been guilty of murder and eligible for the death penalty under then-extant state law, according to the [[felony murder rule]].{{citation needed|date=August 2024}}


Furman was tried for murder and was found guilty based largely on his own statement. Although he was sentenced to death, the punishment was never performed.
===Holding===


Lucious Jackson was sentenced to death by the [[Supreme Court of Georgia (U.S. state)|Supreme Court of Georgia]] for raping a white woman. Elmer Branch was sentenced to death for raping a 65 year old white woman before attempting to rob her. ''Branch v. Texas'' was brought to the Supreme Court of the United States on appeal on ''[[certiorari]]'' to the [[Texas Court of Criminal Appeals]]. Like Jackson, Branch was convicted of rape.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Cruel and Unusual Punishment: The Death Penalty Cases: Furman v. Georgia, Jackson v. Georgia, Branch v. Texas |journal=Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science |date=1972 |volume=63 |page=484|doi=10.2307/1141799 |jstor=1141799 }}</ref>
In a 5-4 decision, the Court's one-page ''[[per curiam]]'' opinion held that the imposition of the death penalty in these cases constituted [[cruel and unusual punishment]] and violated the Constitution. In over two hundred pages of [[concurring opinion|concurrence]] and [[dissenting opinion|dissents]], the justices articulated their views on this controversial subject. Only Justices Brennan and Marshall believed the death penalty to be [[unconstitutional]] in all instances. Other concurrences focused on the arbitrary nature with which death sentences have been imposed, often indicating a [[Race (classification of human beings) |racial]] bias against [[black]] defendants. The Court's decision forced states and the [[US Congress|national legislature]] to rethink their statutes for capital offenses to assure that the death penalty would not be administered in a capricious or discriminatory manner.


==Supreme Court decision==
==Analysis==


The Supreme Court split five to four in overturning the imposition of the death penalty in each of the consolidated cases. The majority could not agree as to a rationale and did not produce a controlling opinion. Instead, each of the nine justices wrote separately, with none of the five justices constituting the majority joining in the opinion of any other.
The Court's one-paragraph ''[[per curiam]]'' opinion held that "the imposition of the death penalty...in these cases constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments."<ref name=graetz>Graetz, M. J., Greenhouse, L. (2017). The Burger Court and the Rise of the Judicial Right. United States: Simon & Schuster. p. 21</ref>


A majority of Justices agreed that arbitrariness in capital sentencing violated the Eighth Amendment. However, the justices could not agree as to a rationale. There was not any signed opinion of the court or any plurality opinion as none of the five justices in the majority joined the opinion of any other. It was the longest set of opinions the Court had ever written, over 233 pages.<ref name=graetz/>
Justice [[Potter Stewart]], as one of the majority, wrote that:
<blockquote>
"These death sentences are [[cruel and unusual punishment|cruel and unusual]] in the same way that being struck by lightning is cruel and unusual. For, of all the people convicted of rapes and murders in 1967 and 1968, many just as reprehensible as these, the petitioners are among a capriciously selected random handful upon whom the sentence of death has in fact been imposed. My concurring Brothers have demonstrated that, if any basis can be discerned for the selection of these few to be sentenced to death, it is the constitutionally impermissible basis of race. See ''[[McLaughlin v. Florida]]'', [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=379&invol=184 379 U.S. 184] (1964) But racial discrimination has not been proved, and I put it to one side. I simply conclude that the [[Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Eighth]] and [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth Amendments]] cannot tolerate the infliction of a sentence of death under legal systems that permit this unique penalty to be so wantonly and so freakishly imposed."
</blockquote>


Three justices raised concerns about racial bias.<ref name=sarat>{{cite web |last=Sarat |first=Austin |title=Fifty Years Ago, the Supreme Court Tried to Reduce Racial Bias in the Death Penalty. Did It Work? |date=May 11, 2022 |website=Slate.com|url=https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/05/landmark-supreme-court-ruling-death-penalty-racial-bias.html}}</ref> Justice Douglas said "the idea of equal protection of the laws [is] implicit in the ban on 'cruel and unusual' punishments". Marshall said there was "evidence of racial discrimination".Of the dissenters, Justice [[Lewis Powell]] was concerned by empirical evidence of racial discrimination.<ref name=Kirchmeier_chapter7/>
==Concurrences==


===Per curiam opinion===
* Justices [[Byron White]] and [[William O. Douglas]] expressed similar concerns about the apparent arbitrariness with which death sentences were imposed under the existing laws.


Justices [[Potter Stewart]] and [[Byron White]], considered the swing votes, reasoned that erratic and arbitrary imposition of the death penalty violated the constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Both Potter and Stewart limited their decisions to the three arbitrarily imposed death sentences before the court.<ref name=nytimes1972>{{Cite web |last=Graham |first=Fred P. |title=Court Spares 600 |date=June 30, 1972 |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1972/06/30/archives/court-spares-600-4-justices-named-by-nixon-all-dissent-in-historic.html}}</ref>
* Justices [[William J. Brennan|Brennan]] and [[Thurgood Marshall|Marshall]] concurred on the grounds that the death penalty was "cruel and unusual punishment" proscribed by the Eighth Amendment as incompatible with the evolving standards of decency of a contemporary society. Because the opinions of Justices Stewart and White were the narrowest, finding only that the death penalty as applied under the statutes in existence at the time was cruel and unusual, theirs are often considered the controlling majority opinions.

In one of the most famous quotes from the case Justice Stewart said "These death sentences are [[cruel and unusual punishment|cruel and unusual]] in the same way that being struck by lightning is cruel and unusual."<ref name =graetz/>

For White, the constitutional violation arose from the death penalty being imposed too infrequently to serve the public purpose of deterrence "to the extent the moral justification for the use of the punishment is compromised".<ref name=polsby/> Justice Stewart said [[retributive justice|retributive punishment]] was a constitutionally permissible "ingredient" of punishment (a view subsequently supported by only four Justices in the ''Gregg'' plurality opinion):<ref name=graetz/>

<blockquote>I cannot agree that retribution is a constitutionally impermissible ingredient in the imposition of punishment. The impact for retribution is part of the nature of man, and channeling that instinct in the administration of criminal justice serves an important purpose in promoting the stability of a society governed by law. When people begin to believe that organized society is unwilling or unable to impose upon criminal offenders the punishment they "deserve", then there are sown the seeds of anarchy—of self-help, vigilante justice and lynch law.</blockquote>

Justices [[William J. Brennan]] and [[Thurgood Marshall]] concluded that the death penalty was in itself "cruel and unusual punishment" because it was excessive, served no valid legislative purpose and was incompatible with the evolving standards of decency of a contemporary society.<ref name=Kirchmeier_chapter7/> Marshall commented further on the possibility of [[wrongful execution]], writing:

{{blockquote|No matter how careful courts are, the possibility of perjured testimony, mistaken honest testimony and human error remain too real. We have no way of judging how many innocent persons have been executed, but we can be certain that there were some.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt14btc21|access-date=2021-08-06|website=www.jstor.org| jstor=j.ctt14btc21 |language=en| title=Wrongful Conviction | year=2008 | publisher=Temple University Press | isbn=9781592136452 }}</ref>}}

Marshall said "Retribution for its own sake is improper" and based his reasoning on a deterrence theory of punishment concluding that "capital punishment is not necessary as a deterrent to crime in our society."<ref name=polsby>{{cite journal |last=Polsby |first=Daniel D. |title=The Death of Capital Punishment? Furman v. Georgia |journal=Supreme Court Review |date=1972 |url=https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/supremecourtrev/vol1972/iss1/2/}}</ref>


==Dissents==
==Dissents==


Chief Justice Burger and Justices [[Harry Blackmun]], [[Lewis F. Powell]], and [[William H. Rehnquist]], each appointed by [[Richard Nixon|President Richard Nixon]], dissented. They argued that capital punishment had always been regarded as appropriate under the [[Common law|Anglo-American legal tradition]] for serious crimes and that the text of the [[US Constitution|Constitution]] implicitly authorized [[Capital punishment in the United States|United States death penalty laws]] because of the reference in the Fourteenth Amendment to the taking of "life."
Chief Justice [[Warren E. Burger|Warren Burger]] and Justices [[Harry Blackmun]], [[Lewis F. Powell]], and [[William H. Rehnquist]], each appointed by [[Richard Nixon|President Richard Nixon]], dissented. They argued that a punishment provided in 40 state [[statute]]s (at the time) and by the federal government could not be ruled contrary to the so-called "evolving standard of decency". Blackmun and Burger also stated that they personally opposed the death penalty, and would vote against it, or "restrict it to a small category of the most heinous crimes", if on the state legislature, but that it was constitutional nonetheless.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Howard|first=A. E. Dick|date=1977|title=From Warren to Burger: Activism and Restraint|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/40469455|journal=The Wilson Quarterly|volume=1|issue=3|pages=109–121|jstor=40469455 |issn=0363-3276}}</ref> In his dissent, Burger wrote, "in the 181 years since the enactment of the Eighth Amendment, not a single decision of this Court has cast the slightest shadow of a doubt on the constitutionality of capital punishment".<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=Lain|first=Corinna Barrett|date=2007|title=Deciding Death|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/40040587|journal=Duke Law Journal|volume=57|issue=1|pages=1–83|jstor=40040587 |issn=0012-7086}}</ref>


==Aftermath==
==Aftermath==
The Supreme Court's decision marked the first time the Justices vacated a death sentence under the Eighth Amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause, resulting in over 630 death sentences being vacated and reduced to reduced to [[life imprisonment]].<ref name=":0" /><ref name="Latzer">Barry Latzer (2010), ''Death Penalty Cases: Leading U.S. Supreme Court Cases on Capital Punishment'', Elsevier, p.37.</ref> There weren't many cases of serious recividivsm but there were a few homicides, including an especially heinous case in Texas where several young women were raped and strangled.<ref name=Kirchmeier_chapter7/>


Many thought the decision heralded the end of capital punishment in the United States.<ref name=sarat/> The next day, columnist [[Barry Schweid]] wrote that it was "unlikely" that the death penalty could exist anymore in the United States<ref>[https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=pAoQAAAAIBAJ&sjid=2YoDAAAAIBAJ&pg=3786,38609&hl=en ''The Free Lance-Star'' - Jun 30, 1972: "New laws unlikely on the death penalty," by Barry Schweid]</ref> but there was a backlash and public support for the death penalty increased dramatically after the ''Furman'' decision. According to Stephen F. Smith the increase of public support for the death penalty was driven by the "politicization of the death penalty". He says "the number of executions might well have continued to decline but for the Court's effort, in the early 1970s, to impose constitutional limits on capital punishment".<ref name=smith>{{cite journal |last=Smith |first=Stephen F. |year=2008 |title=The Supreme Court and the Politics of Death |journal=Virginia Law Review |volume=94 |issue=2 |pages=283–383 |url=http://www.virginialawreview.org/volumes/content/supreme-court-and-politics-death}}</ref><ref name=sarat/>
In the following four years, 37 states enacted new death penalty laws aimed at overcoming the court's concerns about arbitrary imposition of the death penalty. Several statutes mandating bifurcated trials, with separate guilt-innocence and sentencing phases, and imposing standards to guide the discretion of juries and judges in imposing capital sentences, were upheld in a series of Supreme Court decisions in 1976, led by ''[[Gregg v. Georgia]]''. Other statutes enacted in response to ''Furman'' which mandated imposition of the death penalty upon conviction of certain crimes were struck down in cases of that same year.

During the next four years, 37 states enacted death penalty statutes intended to overcome the court's concerns about the arbitrary imposition of the death penalty, including one state that had previously abolished the death penalty.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=smith/> Many of the new statutes that mandated bifurcated trials, with separate guilt-innocence and sentencing phases, and imposed standards to guide the discretion of juries and judges in imposing capital sentences, were upheld in a series of Supreme Court decisions in 1976, beginning with ''[[Gregg v. Georgia]]''. Other statutes enacted in response to ''Furman,'' such as [[Gregg v. Georgia#Louisiana|Louisiana's]], which mandated imposition of the death penalty upon conviction of certain crimed, were invalidated for cases of that same year.<ref name=sarat/>


==See also==
==See also==
*[[Capital punishment in the United States]]
*[[List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 408]]
*[[List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 408]]
*[[Capital Jury Project]]
*''[[Coker v. Georgia]]''
*''[[McCleskey v. Kemp]]''
* ''[[Kennedy v. Louisiana]]''
*''[[Gregg v. Georgia]]''
*''[[Baze v. Rees]]''
*''[[Glossip v. Gross]]''

== References ==
{{Reflist}}


==Further reading==
==Further reading==
*{{cite journal |last=Smith |first=Stephen F. |authorlink= |coauthors= |year=2008 |month= |title=The Supreme Court and the Politics of Death |journal=Virginia Law Review |volume=94 |issue=2 |pages=283–383 |id= |url=http://www.virginialawreview.org/articles.php?article=213 |accessdate= |quote= }}
*{{cite journal |last=Hull |first=Elizabeth |date=January 2010 |title=Guilty On All Counts |journal=Social Policy |volume=39 | issue=4 |pages=11–25, 15p |url=http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/editorials/34757904/reflection-furman |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304023918/http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/editorials/34757904/reflection-furman |url-status=dead |archive-date=March 4, 2016 |via=[[EBSCOHOST]] }}
*{{Cite book| publisher = University Press of Kansas| isbn = 978-0-7006-1711-1| last = Oshinsky| first = David M.| title = Capital Punishment on Trial: Furman V. Georgia and the Death Penalty in Modern America| date = 2010}}


{{US8thAmendment}}
==External links==
*[http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct-cgi/get-us-cite?408+238 ''Furman v. Georgia'', 408 U.S. 238 (1976)] (full text with links to cited material)
{{wikisource-inline|Furman v. Georgia}}


[[Category:Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause and death penalty case law]]
[[Category:1972 in law]]
[[Category:United States Supreme Court cases]]
[[Category:United States death penalty case law]]
[[Category:United States Eighth Amendment case law]]
[[Category:Capital punishment in the United States]]
[[Category:Capital punishment in Georgia (U.S. state)]]
[[Category:Capital punishment in Georgia (U.S. state)]]
[[Category:1972 in United States case law]]

[[Category:20th-century American trials]]
[[nl:Furman vs. Georgia]]
[[pl:Furman v. Georgia]]
[[Category:Trials in Georgia (U.S. state)]]
[[Category:American Civil Liberties Union litigation]]
[[sv:Furman mot Georgia]]
[[Category:United States Supreme Court cases of the Burger Court]]
[[Category:United States Supreme Court cases]]

Latest revision as of 03:59, 4 September 2024

Furman v. Georgia
Argued January 17, 1972
Decided June 29, 1972
Full case nameWilliam Henry Furman v. State of Georgia
Citations408 U.S. 238 (more)
92 S. Ct. 2726; 33 L. Ed. 2d 346; 1972 U.S. LEXIS 169
Case history
PriorCert. granted, 403 U.S. 952.
SubsequentRehearing denied, 409 U.S. 902.
Holding
The arbitrary and inconsistent imposition of the death penalty violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, and constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William O. Douglas · William J. Brennan Jr.
Potter Stewart · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall · Harry Blackmun
Lewis F. Powell Jr. · William Rehnquist
Case opinions
Per curiam
ConcurrenceDouglas
ConcurrenceBrennan
ConcurrenceStewart
ConcurrenceWhite
ConcurrenceMarshall
DissentBurger, joined by Blackmun, Powell, Rehnquist
DissentBlackmun
DissentPowell, joined by Burger, Blackmun, Rehnquist
DissentRehnquist, joined by Burger, Blackmun, Powell
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amends. VIII, XIV
Abrogated by
Gregg v. Georgia (1976)

Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972), was a landmark criminal case in which the United States Supreme Court decided that arbitrary and inconsistent imposition of the death penalty violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, and constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. It was a per curiam decision. Five justices each wrote separately in support of the decision .[1]: 467–68  Although the justices didn’t rule that the death penalty was unconstitutional, the Furman decision invalidated the death sentences of nearly 700 people.

The decision mandated a degree of consistency in the application of the death penalty. This case resulted in a de facto moratorium of capital punishment throughout the United States. Dozens of states rewrote their death penalty laws, most of which were upheld in the 1976 case Gregg v. Georgia.[2]

The Supreme Court consolidated the cases Jackson v. Georgia and Branch v. Texas with the Furman decision, thereby invalidating the death penalty for rape; this ruling was confirmed post-Gregg in Coker v. Georgia. The Court had also intended to include the case of Aikens v. California, but between the time Aikens had been heard in oral argument and a decision was to be issued, the Supreme Court of California decided in California v. Anderson that the death penalty violated the state constitution; Aikens was therefore dismissed as moot, since this decision reduced all death sentences in California to life imprisonment.[3]

Background

[edit]

The death penalty used to be a mandatory sentence for murder but by the 1970s most states had given juries complete discretion in deciding who should be executed and who should be sent to prison. Defense attorneys challenged death sentences on the grounds that jury discretion in capital cases resulted in arbitrary sentences being imposed in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth amendments. In McGautha v. California, decided thirteen months before Furman, the Burger Court held that absolute jury discretion in capital sentencing did not violate the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. Justices Douglas, Brennan and Marshall dissented. McGautha left unresolved similar challenges under the Eighth Amendment.[4]

Case history

[edit]

In the Furman v. Georgia case, William Micke awoke in the middle of the night to find William Henry Furman committing burglary in his house. At trial, in an unsworn statement allowed by Georgia criminal procedure, Furman said that while trying to escape, he tripped and the weapon he was carrying fired accidentally, killing the victim. This contradicted his prior statement to police that he had turned and fired a shot blindly while fleeing. In either event, because the shooting occurred during the commission of a felony, Furman would have been guilty of murder and eligible for the death penalty under then-extant state law, according to the felony murder rule.[citation needed]

Furman was tried for murder and was found guilty based largely on his own statement. Although he was sentenced to death, the punishment was never performed.

Lucious Jackson was sentenced to death by the Supreme Court of Georgia for raping a white woman. Elmer Branch was sentenced to death for raping a 65 year old white woman before attempting to rob her. Branch v. Texas was brought to the Supreme Court of the United States on appeal on certiorari to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Like Jackson, Branch was convicted of rape.[5]

Supreme Court decision

[edit]

The Court's one-paragraph per curiam opinion held that "the imposition of the death penalty...in these cases constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments."[6]

A majority of Justices agreed that arbitrariness in capital sentencing violated the Eighth Amendment. However, the justices could not agree as to a rationale. There was not any signed opinion of the court or any plurality opinion as none of the five justices in the majority joined the opinion of any other. It was the longest set of opinions the Court had ever written, over 233 pages.[6]

Three justices raised concerns about racial bias.[7] Justice Douglas said "the idea of equal protection of the laws [is] implicit in the ban on 'cruel and unusual' punishments". Marshall said there was "evidence of racial discrimination".Of the dissenters, Justice Lewis Powell was concerned by empirical evidence of racial discrimination.[4]

Per curiam opinion

[edit]

Justices Potter Stewart and Byron White, considered the swing votes, reasoned that erratic and arbitrary imposition of the death penalty violated the constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Both Potter and Stewart limited their decisions to the three arbitrarily imposed death sentences before the court.[8]

In one of the most famous quotes from the case Justice Stewart said "These death sentences are cruel and unusual in the same way that being struck by lightning is cruel and unusual."[6]

For White, the constitutional violation arose from the death penalty being imposed too infrequently to serve the public purpose of deterrence "to the extent the moral justification for the use of the punishment is compromised".[9] Justice Stewart said retributive punishment was a constitutionally permissible "ingredient" of punishment (a view subsequently supported by only four Justices in the Gregg plurality opinion):[6]

I cannot agree that retribution is a constitutionally impermissible ingredient in the imposition of punishment. The impact for retribution is part of the nature of man, and channeling that instinct in the administration of criminal justice serves an important purpose in promoting the stability of a society governed by law. When people begin to believe that organized society is unwilling or unable to impose upon criminal offenders the punishment they "deserve", then there are sown the seeds of anarchy—of self-help, vigilante justice and lynch law.

Justices William J. Brennan and Thurgood Marshall concluded that the death penalty was in itself "cruel and unusual punishment" because it was excessive, served no valid legislative purpose and was incompatible with the evolving standards of decency of a contemporary society.[4] Marshall commented further on the possibility of wrongful execution, writing:

No matter how careful courts are, the possibility of perjured testimony, mistaken honest testimony and human error remain too real. We have no way of judging how many innocent persons have been executed, but we can be certain that there were some.[10]

Marshall said "Retribution for its own sake is improper" and based his reasoning on a deterrence theory of punishment concluding that "capital punishment is not necessary as a deterrent to crime in our society."[9]

Dissents

[edit]

Chief Justice Warren Burger and Justices Harry Blackmun, Lewis F. Powell, and William H. Rehnquist, each appointed by President Richard Nixon, dissented. They argued that a punishment provided in 40 state statutes (at the time) and by the federal government could not be ruled contrary to the so-called "evolving standard of decency". Blackmun and Burger also stated that they personally opposed the death penalty, and would vote against it, or "restrict it to a small category of the most heinous crimes", if on the state legislature, but that it was constitutional nonetheless.[11] In his dissent, Burger wrote, "in the 181 years since the enactment of the Eighth Amendment, not a single decision of this Court has cast the slightest shadow of a doubt on the constitutionality of capital punishment".[12]

Aftermath

[edit]

The Supreme Court's decision marked the first time the Justices vacated a death sentence under the Eighth Amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause, resulting in over 630 death sentences being vacated and reduced to reduced to life imprisonment.[12][13] There weren't many cases of serious recividivsm but there were a few homicides, including an especially heinous case in Texas where several young women were raped and strangled.[4]

Many thought the decision heralded the end of capital punishment in the United States.[7] The next day, columnist Barry Schweid wrote that it was "unlikely" that the death penalty could exist anymore in the United States[14] but there was a backlash and public support for the death penalty increased dramatically after the Furman decision. According to Stephen F. Smith the increase of public support for the death penalty was driven by the "politicization of the death penalty". He says "the number of executions might well have continued to decline but for the Court's effort, in the early 1970s, to impose constitutional limits on capital punishment".[15][7]

During the next four years, 37 states enacted death penalty statutes intended to overcome the court's concerns about the arbitrary imposition of the death penalty, including one state that had previously abolished the death penalty.[12][15] Many of the new statutes that mandated bifurcated trials, with separate guilt-innocence and sentencing phases, and imposed standards to guide the discretion of juries and judges in imposing capital sentences, were upheld in a series of Supreme Court decisions in 1976, beginning with Gregg v. Georgia. Other statutes enacted in response to Furman, such as Louisiana's, which mandated imposition of the death penalty upon conviction of certain crimed, were invalidated for cases of that same year.[7]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Kaplan, John; Weisberg, Robert; Binder, Guyora (2012). Criminal Law – Cases and Materials (7th ed.). Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. ISBN 978-1-4548-0698-1.
  2. ^ Bellware, Kim (July 6, 2022). "Death penalty's 50-year rise and fall since Supreme Court struck it down". The Washington Post.
  3. ^ "Furman v. Georgia (1972)". LII / Legal Information Institute. Cornell Law School. Retrieved May 18, 2021.
  4. ^ a b c d Kirchmeier, Jeffrey L., 'Into the Courthouse: The 1970s Abolition Strategy', in *Imprisoned by the Past: Warren McCleskey and the American Death Penalty* (New York, 2015)
  5. ^ "Cruel and Unusual Punishment: The Death Penalty Cases: Furman v. Georgia, Jackson v. Georgia, Branch v. Texas". Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science. 63: 484. 1972. doi:10.2307/1141799. JSTOR 1141799.
  6. ^ a b c d Graetz, M. J., Greenhouse, L. (2017). The Burger Court and the Rise of the Judicial Right. United States: Simon & Schuster. p. 21
  7. ^ a b c d Sarat, Austin (May 11, 2022). "Fifty Years Ago, the Supreme Court Tried to Reduce Racial Bias in the Death Penalty. Did It Work?". Slate.com.
  8. ^ Graham, Fred P. (June 30, 1972). "Court Spares 600". The New York Times.
  9. ^ a b Polsby, Daniel D. (1972). "The Death of Capital Punishment? Furman v. Georgia". Supreme Court Review.
  10. ^ Wrongful Conviction. Temple University Press. 2008. ISBN 9781592136452. JSTOR j.ctt14btc21. Retrieved August 6, 2021. {{cite book}}: |website= ignored (help)
  11. ^ Howard, A. E. Dick (1977). "From Warren to Burger: Activism and Restraint". The Wilson Quarterly. 1 (3): 109–121. ISSN 0363-3276. JSTOR 40469455.
  12. ^ a b c Lain, Corinna Barrett (2007). "Deciding Death". Duke Law Journal. 57 (1): 1–83. ISSN 0012-7086. JSTOR 40040587.
  13. ^ Barry Latzer (2010), Death Penalty Cases: Leading U.S. Supreme Court Cases on Capital Punishment, Elsevier, p.37.
  14. ^ The Free Lance-Star - Jun 30, 1972: "New laws unlikely on the death penalty," by Barry Schweid
  15. ^ a b Smith, Stephen F. (2008). "The Supreme Court and the Politics of Death". Virginia Law Review. 94 (2): 283–383.

Further reading

[edit]
  • Hull, Elizabeth (January 2010). "Guilty On All Counts". Social Policy. 39 (4): 11–25, 15p. Archived from the original on March 4, 2016 – via EBSCOHOST.
  • Oshinsky, David M. (2010). Capital Punishment on Trial: Furman V. Georgia and the Death Penalty in Modern America. University Press of Kansas. ISBN 978-0-7006-1711-1.