Chapter 3 Outline

William Henry Furman was accused of shooting and killing William Micki in a home invasion. The jury found Furman guilty of murder and sentenced him to death because the jury had no guidelines to follow
Writ of certiorari: Order to a lower court to send their record of the case to the Supreme Court for review
In 1972, the Supreme Court received the following three cases for review: Furman v. Georgia, Jackson v. Georgia, and Branch v. Texas
In the Furman decision, the Supreme Court declared the death penalty, as it was currently administered, unconstitutional
Per curiam decision: An unsigned opinion from the Court that is meant to represent the decision of the Court as an institution, rather than that of individual justices
The Furman decision resulted in the reversal of over 600 death sentences in 39 states
The states were left with two options to comply with the Court’s ruling in Furman: One was to attach mandatory death penalty sentences to certain crimes and the other to set standards for the juries and judges that would guide their decision-making processes

Gregg was a white man charged with armed robbery and murder for killing two men who picked him and a friend up and gave them a ride (they were hitchhiking)
The Supreme Court decided to rule on the issue of whether or not the death penalty for murder was constitutional (8th and 14th Amendments). It upheld Gregg’s death sentence in a 7-2 decision effectively reinstating the death penalty
Model Penal Code: A quasi-criminal code adopted by the American Legal Institute (ALI) that outlined the way capital punishment ought to be administered
Aggravating factors: Those that increase an offender’s level of culpability or the severity of the crime (intentionally torturing and killing a person)
Mitigating factors: Those that decrease the offender’s level of culpability (mental capacity of offender)
In 2009, the ALI announced the Model Penal Code would no longer contain capital punishment provisions
Super due process: The phrase used to describe the dramatic expansion of the due process and rights of capital defendants
Additional Cases of Interest
Woodson v. North Carolina (1976): The Court ruled mandatory death sentences unconstitutional because they fail to take into consideration the individual characteristics and history of the defendant

Coker was an escaped convict who was charged with rape, kidnapping, armed robbery, prison escape, and motor vehicle theft. Before he escaped from prison, he was serving several life sentences for rape, murder, and kidnapping
The issue before the Court was whether or not it is constitutional according to the 8th and 14th Amendments to sentence a person to death for the crime of rape
The Court decided that the death penalty for rape is not constitutional
Evolving standards of decency: A phrase used by the courts for considering what the framers of the Constitution might have thought about when determining whether or not a certain punishment is in violation of the 8th Amendment
Additional Cases of Interest:
- Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008): Louisiana authorized the death penalty for child rape and the Court ruled that the statute violated the 8th Amendment for the same reasons outlined in Coker. The crime of child rape cannot be punishable by death.

Lockett v. Ohio (1978) and Bell v. Ohio (1978): The number of mitigating circumstances that jurors are allowed to consider is at issue in these two cases
The Court ruled that states cannot limit defendant mitigation in capital cases
Sandra Lockett was a 21 year old Black woman from Ohio convicted of aggravated robbery and aggravated murder of a pawnshop clerk. Lockett was driving the getaway car and was not in the pawnshop when the clerk was shot and killed.
At the time, juries in Ohio were able to circumvent the intent element requirement by assigning equal blame to offenders who aid and abet in capital crimes as if they were the principal offenders themselves. Thus, Lockett was sentenced to death.
Lockett’s death sentence was reversed and she is currently serving a life sentence because her presentence and psychological reports indicated she had a mitigating circumstance that was not formally addressed at sentencing (low IQ)
Additional Cases of Interest:
Eddings v. Oklahoma (1982): The Court ruled that trial courts must consider all mitigations offered by the defense in capital cases
Enmund v. Florida (1982): The Court held that it is unconstitutional to impose a death sentence on a defendant who did not kill, attempt to kill, or intend for a killing to happen

Warren McClesky was a Black man from Georgia who was convicted of armed robbery and the murder of a White police officer and was given the death sentence
Baldus Study: Examined over 2,000 capital cases in Georgia and revealed that race played a role in Georgia’s death penalty decisions
McClesky’s attorneys used the Baldus Study to show a racial bias in death sentences
The Court did not find that McClesky’s death sentence resulted from racially discriminatory decision-making. His death sentence was upheld in a 5-4 vote, and he was executed in Georgia’s electric chair in 1991

Kevin Stanford was a 17-year-old who kidnapped, raped and killed a 20-year-old female gas station attendant.
Stanford was waived to adult court because he was charged with a capital offense and had a lengthy juvenile record and was convicted of murder, sodomy, and robbery (among other crimes) and sentenced to death
Stanford appealed to the Supreme Court arguing that capital punishment for juveniles violates the 8th Amendment and that state laws have long recognized the need for differential treatment of juveniles due to age and limited decision-making capabilities
The ruling in this case was whether imposing the death penalty on juveniles who are 16 and 17 is constitutional
In a 5-4 vote, the court affirmed the judgments of the lower courts that the death penalty for juveniles was not unconstitutional
The justices utilized the evolving standards of decency standard
Additional Cases of Interest
Thompson v. Oklahoma (1988): The court ruled it is unconstitutional to execute juveniles who committed crimes at the age of 15
Roper v. Simmons (2005): The Court essentially overturned the Stanford decision, thereby declaring it unconstitutional to execute juveniles of any age under 18