List of U.S. Supreme Court decisions on capital punishment
Encyclopedia
The U.S. Supreme Court has issued numerous rulings on the use of capital punishment
Capital punishment
Capital punishment, the death penalty, or execution is the sentence of death upon a person by the state as a punishment for an offence. Crimes that can result in a death penalty are known as capital crimes or capital offences. The term capital originates from the Latin capitalis, literally...

 (the death penalty). While some rulings applied very narrowly, perhaps to only one individual, other cases have had great influence over wide areas of procedure, eligible crimes, acceptable evidence and method of execution.
Year Case Ruling
1879 Wilkerson v. Utah
Wilkerson v. Utah
Wilkerson v. Utah, 99 U.S. 130 , is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court affirmed the judgment of the Supreme Court of the Territory of Utah in stating that execution by firing squad, as prescribed by the Utah territorial statute, was not cruel and unusual punishment under the...

Execution as prescribed by territorial (or state) statute does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment
Cruel and unusual punishment
Cruel and unusual punishment is a phrase describing criminal punishment which is considered unacceptable due to the suffering or humiliation it inflicts on the condemned person...

.
1905 Rooney v. North Dakota
John Rooney (murderer)
John Rooney was an American convicted murderer and was the last person executed by North Dakota.On 26 August 1902, a farm worker named Harold Sweet was shot and killed during a robbery near the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railroad tracks on the west side of Fargo, North Dakota. Rooney was...

Adoption of private execution versus public execution after sentence and prior execution does not affect this sentence.
1932 Powell v. Alabama
Powell v. Alabama
Powell v. Alabama was a United States Supreme Court decision which determined that in a capital trial, the defendant must be given access to counsel upon his or her own request as part of due process.-Background of the case:...

Judges are required to ensure that indigent defendants in capital cases who could not represent themselves be appointed counsel.
1947 Francis v. Resweber
Francis v. Resweber
State of Louisiana Ex Rel. Francis v. Resweber, , is a case in which the U.S. Supreme Court was asked whether imposing capital punishment a second time, after it failed in an attempt to execute Willie Francis in 1946, constituted a violation of the United States Constitution...

Re-execution after a failed attempt does not constitute double jeopardy
Double jeopardy
Double jeopardy is a procedural defense that forbids a defendant from being tried again on the same, or similar charges following a legitimate acquittal or conviction...

1968 Witherspoon v. Illinois
Witherspoon v. Illinois
Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 , was a U.S. Supreme Court case where the court ruled that a state statute providing the state unlimited challenge for cause of jurors who might have any objection to the death penalty gave too much bias in favor of the prosecution.The Court said, The decision...

A state may not have unlimited challenge for cause of jurors who might have any objection to the death penalty. (See also Morgan v. Illinois
Morgan v. Illinois
Morgan v. Illinois, 504 U.S. 719 , is a case decided by the United States Supreme Court.-Background:In an elaboration of the Witherspoon v. Illinois doctrine, the Rehnquist Court considered challenges to the selection of jurors who would automatically vote to impose the death penalty on a defendant...

 (1992))
1971 McGautha v. California
McGautha v. California
McGautha v. California, 402 U.S. 183 is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the accused's rights were not infringed by imposition of the death penalty without governing standards....

Held that death penalty can be imposed by a jury without standards to govern its imposition, and that a unitary guilt and punishment proceeding was constitutional. (First finding modified in Furman v. Georgia
Furman v. Georgia
Furman v. Georgia, was a United States Supreme Court decision that ruled on the requirement for a degree of consistency in the application of the death penalty. The case led to a de facto moratorium on capital punishment throughout the United States, which came to an end when Gregg v. Georgia was...

 (1972), second finding modified in Gregg v. Georgia
Gregg v. Georgia
Gregg v. Georgia, Proffitt v. Florida, Jurek v. Texas, Woodson v. North Carolina, and Roberts v. Louisiana, 428 U.S. 153 , reaffirmed the United States Supreme Court's acceptance of the use of the death penalty in the United States, upholding, in particular, the death sentence imposed on Troy Leon...

 (1976))
1972 Furman v. Georgia
Furman v. Georgia
Furman v. Georgia, was a United States Supreme Court decision that ruled on the requirement for a degree of consistency in the application of the death penalty. The case led to a de facto moratorium on capital punishment throughout the United States, which came to an end when Gregg v. Georgia was...

Ruled on the requirement for a degree of consistency in the application of the death penalty. This ruling effectively established a four year moratorium on the death penalty between 1972 and 1976, when it was reinstated by Gregg v. Georgia
Gregg v. Georgia
Gregg v. Georgia, Proffitt v. Florida, Jurek v. Texas, Woodson v. North Carolina, and Roberts v. Louisiana, 428 U.S. 153 , reaffirmed the United States Supreme Court's acceptance of the use of the death penalty in the United States, upholding, in particular, the death sentence imposed on Troy Leon...

, as listed below.
1976 Gregg v. Georgia
Gregg v. Georgia
Gregg v. Georgia, Proffitt v. Florida, Jurek v. Texas, Woodson v. North Carolina, and Roberts v. Louisiana, 428 U.S. 153 , reaffirmed the United States Supreme Court's acceptance of the use of the death penalty in the United States, upholding, in particular, the death sentence imposed on Troy Leon...

Reaffirmed the Supreme Court's acceptance of the use of the death penalty in the United States.
1977 Coker v. Georgia
Coker v. Georgia
Coker v. Georgia, , held that the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution forbade the death penalty for the crime of rape of a woman.-Facts:...

Under Eighth Amendment
Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights which prohibits the federal government from imposing excessive bail, excessive fines or cruel and unusual punishments. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that this amendment's Cruel and Unusual...

, held that the death penalty is an unconstitutional punishment for rape of an adult woman when the victim is not killed.
1978 Lockett v. Ohio
Lockett v. Ohio
Lockett v. Ohio, 438 U.S. 586 is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that sentencing authorities must have the discretion to consider every possible mitigating factor, rather than being limited to a specific list of factors....

Sentencing authorities must have the discretion to consider every possible mitigating factor, rather than being limited to a specific list of factors.
1980 Beck v. Alabama
Beck v. Alabama
Beck v. Alabama, 447 U.S. 625 is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a jury must be allowed to consider lesser included offenses, not just capital offense or acquittal....

Jury must be allowed to consider lesser included offense, not just capital offense or acquittal
1982 Enmund v. Florida
Enmund v. Florida
Enmund v. Florida, , is a United States Supreme Court case was a 5-4 decision in which the United States Supreme Court applied its capital proportionality principle to set aside the death penalty for the driver of a getaway car in a robbery-murder of an elderly Florida couple.-Background:While...

Death penalty is not allowed for a person who is a minor participant in a felony and does not kill, attempt to kill, or intend to kill.
1984 Pulley v. Harris
Pulley v. Harris
Pulley v. Harris, 465 U.S. 37 is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that there was no constitutional requirement for a proportionality review of sentences in comparable cases throughout a state.-External links:*...

Found that there was no constitutional requirement for a proportionality review of sentences in comparable cases throughout a state
1984 Spaziano v. Florida
Spaziano v. Florida
Spaziano v. Florida, was two United States Supreme Court cases dealing with the imposition of the death penalty. In the first case, 454 U.S. 1037, , the Supreme Court, with two dissents, refused Spaziano's petition for certiorari...

It is constitutional for a judge to override a jury's recommendation of life imprisonment and impose the death penalty. Essentially overruled by Ring v. Arizona
Ring v. Arizona
Ring v. Arizona, , is a case in which the United States Supreme Court applied the rule of Apprendi v. New Jersey, , to capital sentencing schemes, holding that the Sixth Amendment requires a jury to find the aggravating factors necessary for imposing the death penalty. Ring overruled a portion of...

.
1985 Glass v. Louisiana
Glass v. Louisiana
Glass v. Louisiana, , was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court in 1985.- Background :Jimmy L. Glass was sentenced to death by the state of Louisiana...

Electrocution does not violate Eight Amendment
1986 Ford v. Wainwright
Ford v. Wainwright
Ford v. Wainwright, ', was the case in which the United States Supreme Court upheld the common law rule that the insane cannot be executed; therefore the petitioner is entitled to a competency evaluation and to an evidentiary hearing in court on the question of his competency to be...

Execution of insane persons banned under Eighth Amendment.
1987 Tison v. Arizona
Tison v. Arizona
Tison v. Arizona, like Enmund v. Florida, was a 5-4 decision in which the United States Supreme Court qualified the rule it set forth in Enmund...

Death penalty may be imposed on a felony-murder defendant who was a major participant in the underlying felony and exhibits extreme indifference to human life.
1987 McCleskey v. Kemp
McCleskey v. Kemp
McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279 , was a United States Supreme Court court case, in which the death penalty sentencing of McCleskey for armed robbery and murder was upheld...

Racial disparities not recognized as a constitutional violation of "equal protection of the law" unless intentional racial discrimination against the defendant can be shown.
1988 Lowenfield v. Phelps
Lowenfield v. Phelps
Lowenfield v. Phelps, 484 U.S. 231 is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the two jury polls and the supplemental charge did not impermissibly coerce the jury to return a death sentence, and that the death sentence does not violate the Eighth Amendment simply because...

Found that the function of restricting the class of murderers eligible for capital punishment can be accomplished by explicit law or by findings of aggravating circumstances
1988 Thompson v. Oklahoma
Thompson v. Oklahoma
Thompson v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 815 , was the first case since the moratorium on capital punishment was lifted in the United States in which the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the death sentence of a minor on grounds of "cruel and unusual punishment."...

Executions of offenders age fifteen and younger at the time of their crimes is unconstitutional under Eighth Amendment.
1989 Stanford v. Kentucky
Stanford v. Kentucky
Stanford v. Kentucky, , was a United States Supreme Court case that sanctioned the imposition of the death penalty on offenders who were at least 16 years of age at the time of the crime. This decision came one year after Thompson v...

Eighth Amendment does not prohibit the death penalty for crimes committed at age sixteen or seventeen. (Overturned in Roper v. Simmons (2005))
1989 Penry v. Lynaugh
Penry v. Lynaugh
Penry v. Lynaugh, , sanctioned the death penalty for mentally retarded offenders because the Court determined executing the mentally retarded was not "cruel and unusual punishment" under the Eighth Amendment...

Executing persons with mental retardation
Mental retardation
Mental retardation is a generalized disorder appearing before adulthood, characterized by significantly impaired cognitive functioning and deficits in two or more adaptive behaviors...

 is not a violation of the Eighth Amendment. (Overturned in Atkins v. Virginia (2002))
1990 Walton v. Arizona
Walton v. Arizona
Walton v. Arizona, 497 U.S. 639 , upheld two important aspects of the capital sentencing scheme in the U.S. state of Arizona — judicial sentencing and the aggravating factor "especially heinous, cruel, or depraved" — as not unconstitutionally vague. The Supreme Court has overruled the first of...

Found judicial sentencing and the aggravating factor "especially heinous, cruel, or depraved" are not unconstitutionally vague. (First finding overturned in Ring v. Arizona (2002))
1992 Morgan v. Illinois
Morgan v. Illinois
Morgan v. Illinois, 504 U.S. 719 , is a case decided by the United States Supreme Court.-Background:In an elaboration of the Witherspoon v. Illinois doctrine, the Rehnquist Court considered challenges to the selection of jurors who would automatically vote to impose the death penalty on a defendant...

A defendant may challenge for cause a prospective juror who would automatically vote to impose the death penalty in every capital case
1993 Herrera v. Collins
Herrera v. Collins
Herrera v. Collins, , is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a claim that the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment prohibits the execution of one who is actually innocent is not ground for federal habeas relief.-Background:On September 29, 1981,...

In the absence of other constitutional grounds, new evidence of innocence is no reason for federal court to order a new trial.
1995 Schlup v. Delo
Schlup v. Delo
Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298 , was a case in which the United States Supreme Court expanded the ability to reopen a case in light of new evidence of innocence.Petitioner Lloyd E...

Expanded the ability to reopen a case in light of new evidence of innocence
2002 Ring v. Arizona
Ring v. Arizona
Ring v. Arizona, , is a case in which the United States Supreme Court applied the rule of Apprendi v. New Jersey, , to capital sentencing schemes, holding that the Sixth Amendment requires a jury to find the aggravating factors necessary for imposing the death penalty. Ring overruled a portion of...

A death sentence where the necessary aggravating factors are determined by a judge violates a defendant's constitutional right to a trial by jury.
2002 Atkins v. Virginia
Atkins v. Virginia
Atkins v. Virginia, , is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled 6-3 that executing the mentally retarded violates the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishments.-The case:...

The execution of mentally retarded defendants violates the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
2004 Tennard v. Dretke
Tennard v. Dretke
Tennard v. Dretke, 542 U.S. 274 , was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court was asked whether evidence of the defendant's low IQ in a death penalty trial had been adequately presented to the jury for full consideration in the penalty phase of his trial...

Held that all relevant mitigating factors must be considered in the penalty phase of a death penalty case, not just in the trial phase
2004 Schriro v. Summerlin
Schriro v. Summerlin
Schriro v. Summerlin, 542 U.S. 348 , was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that a requirement that a different Supreme Court decision requiring the jury rather than the judge to find aggravating factors would not be applied retroactively.-Facts:In April 1981, Warren Wesley...

Held that a requirement from the Ring decision requiring the jury rather than the judge to find aggravating factors would not be applied retroactively.
2005 Roper v. Simmons
Roper v. Simmons
Roper v. Simmons, was a decision in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that it is unconstitutional to impose capital punishment for crimes committed while under the age of 18. The 5-4 decision overruled the Court's prior ruling upholding such sentences on offenders above or at the...

The death penalty for those who had committed their crimes under 18 years of age is cruel and unusual punishment and violates the Eighth Amendment.
2006 Oregon v. Guzek
Oregon v. Guzek
Oregon v. Guzek, 546 U.S. 517 , was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States, which ruled that the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution does not grant criminal defendants facing the death penalty the right to introduce new evidence of their innocence during sentencing that...

States may limit the evidence of innocence a defendant may present at his sentencing hearing to evidence already presented at his trial.
2006 Hill v. McDonough
Hill v. McDonough
Hill v. McDonough , was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court challenging the use of lethal injection as a form of execution in the state of Florida. The Court ruled unanimously that a challenge to the method of execution as violating the Eighth Amendment to the United States...

Allowed appeal on civil rights violation grounds, even after habeas appeal
2006 Kansas v. Marsh
Kansas v. Marsh
Kansas v. Marsh, 548 U.S. 163 , is a case decided by the United States Supreme Court. The Court held that a Kansas death penalty statute was consistent with the U.S...

States not prohibited from imposing the death penalty when mitigating and aggravating sentencing factors were both present.
2006 House v. Bell
House v. Bell
House v. Bell, 547 U.S. 518 , was a United States Supreme Court case challenging the permissibility of new DNA forensic evidence that becomes available post-conviction, in capital punishment appeals when those claims have defaulted pursuant to state law. The Court found that admitting new DNA...

Post-conviction DNA forensic evidence can be considered in death penalty appeals.
2008 Medellin v. Texas
Medellín v. Texas
Medellín v. Texas, 552 U.S. 491 is a United States Supreme Court decision which held that while an international treaty may constitute an international commitment, it is not binding domestic law unless Congress has enacted statutes implementing it or unless the treaty itself is "self-executing";...

A requirement imposed by a treaty is not binding unless it was enacted by a statute created by Congress.
2008 Baze v. Rees
Baze v. Rees
Baze v. Rees, 553 U.S. 35 , was a United States Supreme Court case. The court agreed to hear the appeal of two men, Ralph Baze and Thomas Bowling, who were sentenced to death in Kentucky. The men argue that executing them by lethal injection would violate the 8th Amendment prohibition of cruel and...

Found Kentucky's lethal injection method did not violate the Eighth Amendment
2008 Kennedy v. Louisiana
Kennedy v. Louisiana
Kennedy v. Louisiana, 554 U.S. 407 was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that the Eighth Amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause did not permit a state to punish the crime of rape of a child with the death penalty; more broadly, the power of the state...

States may not impose the death penalty for a crime against the person "where the victim's life was not taken"
2009 Harbison v. Bell
Harbison v. Bell
Harbison v. Bell, 556 U.S. ___ was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that federal law gave indigent death row inmates the right to federally appointed counsel to represent them in post-conviction state clemency proceedings, when the state has declined to do so...

Indigent death row inmates sentenced under state law have a right to federally-funded habeas counsel in post-conviction state clemency proceedings, when the state has denied such counsel.

See also

  • Capital punishment in the United States
    Capital punishment in the United States
    Capital punishment in the United States, in practice, applies only for aggravated murder and more rarely for felony murder. Capital punishment was a penalty at common law, for many felonies, and was enforced in all of the American colonies prior to the Declaration of Independence...

  • Participation of medical professionals in American executions
    Participation of medical professionals in American executions
    Participation of medical professionals in American executions is a controversial topic, due to its moral and legal implications. The practice is proscribed by the American Medical Association, as defined in its Code of Medical Ethics...

The source of this article is wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.  The text of this article is licensed under the GFDL.
 
x
OK