NCJ Number
41240
Journal
Dickinson Law Review Volume: 81 Issue: 3 Dated: (SPRING 1977) Pages: 543-573
Date Published
1977
Length
21 pages
Annotation
REVIEW OF FIVE U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISIONS DEALING WITH THE DEATH PENALTY WHICH WERE HANDED DOWN DURING THE 1976 TERM, FOCUSING ON THE WAYS IN WHICH QUESTIONS LEFT OPEN IN FURMAN V GEORGIA (1972) WERE ANSWERED BY THEM.
Abstract
IN FURMAN, THE COURT HELD THAT CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AS THEN ADMINISTERED WAS CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT. THIS LEFT OPEN QUESTIONS OF WHETHER OR NOT THE DEATH PENALTY WAS CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT PER SE; WHETHER THE EXISTENCE OF NONSENTENCING DISCRETION MAKES ADMINISTRATION OF THE DEATH PENALTY UNCONSTITUTIONALLY ARBITRARY; AND WHETHER STATUTES PROVIDING STANDARDS FOR IMPOSING THE DEATH PENALTY OR MAKING IT MANDATORY ARE CONSTITUTIONAL. IN THIS ARTICLE, THE 1976 DECISIONS IN GREGG V GEORGIA, PROFITT V FLORIDA, JUREK V TEXAS, WOODSON V NORTH CAROLINA, AND ROBERTS V LOUISIANA, WHICH HAD THE EFFECTS OF UPHOLDING THE DEATH PENALTY STATUTES IN GA., FLA., AND TEXAS WHILE STRIKING DOWN THOSE OF NORTH CAROLINA AND LOUISIANA, ARE EXAMINED. THE AUTHOR ANALYZES THE COURT'S EIGHTH AMENDMENT RATIONALE AS WELL AS HOW THE UNRESOLVED QUESTIONS OF FURMAN WERE ADDRESSED. THIS ANALYSIS IS THEN APPLIED TO EVALUATE THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF PENNSYLVANIA'S POST-FURMAN CAPITAL PUNISHMENT STATUTE.(AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)...EB