{"id":352259,"date":"2023-12-14T09:52:42","date_gmt":"2023-12-14T14:52:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/content.findlaw-admin.com\/ability-law\/criminal\/criminal-procedure\/death-penalty-challenges.html"},"modified":"2023-12-14T09:52:42","modified_gmt":"2023-12-14T14:52:42","slug":"death-penalty-challenges","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.findlaw.com\/criminal\/criminal-procedure\/death-penalty-challenges.html","title":{"rendered":"Death Penalty Challenges"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n \n
\n

Death Penalty Challenges<\/h1>\n
\n
\n By Susan Buckner, J.D.<\/a> | Legally reviewed by Melissa Bender, Esq.<\/a>\n | Last updated\n
\n \n <\/i>\n Legally Reviewed\n <\/summary>\n\n
\n

This article has been written and reviewed for legal accuracy, clarity, and style by FindLaw\u2019s team of legal writers and attorneys<\/a> and in accordance with our editorial standards<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n <\/div>\n <\/details>\n\n

\n \n <\/i>\n Fact-Checked\n <\/summary>\n\n
\n

The last updated date refers to the last time this article was reviewed by FindLaw or one of our contributing authors<\/a>. We make every effort to keep our articles updated. For information regarding a specific legal issue affecting you, please contact an attorney in your area<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n <\/div>\n <\/details>\n<\/section>\n

\n

A death sentence is the most severe punishment for crime in America. This type of criminal penalty has been the subject of debate since the country’s founding. Today, about half of states and the federal government allow the death penalty.<\/p>\n\n <\/div>\n\n

This article reviews the significant death penalty challenges in the United States. Learn about some of the critical court decisions affecting the criminal justice system.<\/p>\n

But if you need advocacy against serious criminal charges, don’t wait to get legal advice. Find a criminal defense lawyer<\/a> who can work to prevent a deadly sentence.<\/p>\n

Activism Against the Death Penalty in the U.S.<\/h2>\n

Execution has been a common method of penalizing people throughout history. Activists have been challenging death penalty laws for almost as long. Even Thomas Jefferson attempted to limit capital punishment in 1785, but he did not succeed.<\/p>\n

Not until the mid-1950s did the U.S. Supreme Court begin revising and refining the death penalty system. During the 60s and 70s, the laws underwent a series of changes as more states altered their views on the use of the death penalty<\/a> and the state of human rights.<\/p>\n

The Standard of Decency<\/h2>\n

In 1958, the Supreme Court decided in Trop v. Dulles<\/i><\/a> that the Eighth Amendment contained an evolving standard of decency that marked the progress of a maturing society. This is related to the "cruel and unusual punishment" aspect of the Eighth Amendment. Things that were acceptable as punishment in the late 1700s were no longer acceptable in the 1950’s.<\/p>\n

Although Trop<\/i> wasn’t a death penalty case, abolitionists applied the Court’s logic to executions. They maintained that the United States has indeed progressed to the point that its standard of decency should no longer tolerate the death penalty.<\/p>\n

Death Penalty Challenges in the 20th Century<\/h2>\n

As the 20th century progressed, the question of what is acceptable for capital punishment continued to evolve. Activists and advocates became more concerned about wrongful convictions and the risk to innocent people caught in the justice system’s wheels. The two decades after Trop v. Dulles<\/i> saw a number of cases about the nature of due process and the administration of the death penalty in America.<\/p>\n

Due Process: Evidence<\/h3>\n

In 1963, John Brady and Charles Boblit murdered an acquaintance. The court convicted both men and sentenced them to death. On appeal, Brady learned that Boblit, in a separate trial, had confessed to committing the murder alone. This evidence was not given to Brady’s attorney. Based on this evidence, Brady received a new sentencing hearing and a life sentence. <\/i>Brady v. Maryland<\/i>, 373 U.S. 83 (1963)<\/a><\/p>\n

This case established that prosecutors must give defendants all exculpatory evidence before trial.<\/p>\n

In 2006, the Supreme Court reversed and remanded a jury’s death penalty verdict in Holmes v. South Carolina<\/i> 547 U.S. 319 (2006)<\/a>. The court had prevented the defendant from presenting his case that another person had committed the crime because it felt the prosecution’s forensic evidence was too strong to overcome.<\/p>\n

The Court ruled that no matter how compelling the court felt the prosecution’s evidence was, the defendant had an absolute right to present a complete defense.<\/p>\n

Due Process: Juries<\/h3>\n

In Witherspoon v. Illinois<\/i><\/a> 391 U.S. 510 (1968), the Court ruled that prosecutors could not exclude jurors from a death penalty case solely because they had reservations about the death penalty. In Witherspoon<\/i>, the prosecutor excluded all jurors who expressed even a modicum of doubt about capital punishment, leaving the defendant with a jury biased in favor of the death penalty.<\/p>\n

The Court ruled this violated the defendant’s right to a fair and impartial jury. Following this ruling, states had to rewrite jury questions. Prosecutors could ask jurors if they could consider the death penalty and exclude only those who were unable ever to consider applying capital punishment.<\/p>\n

In 1980, jury instructions changed again following Beck v. Alabama<\/i><\/a> <\/i>447 U.S. 625 (1980). Before this case, Alabama judges could only instruct juries in death penalty cases that they must either find the defendant guilty of the capital offense and sentence them to death or acquit them. Jurors could not find defendants guilty of any lesser included offenses.<\/p>\n

The defendant in Beck<\/i> had been involved in a robbery in which someone died. The defendant admitted guilt in the robbery but denied the homicide. The Court’s ruling was succinct: "The death sentence may not constitutionally be imposed after a jury verdict of guilt of a capital offense where the jury was not permitted to consider a verdict of guilt of a lesser included offense." (Beck<\/i> at 633)<\/p>\n

Disparities in Capital Sentencing<\/h3>\n

The most important death penalty case of the 20th Century was Furman v. Georgia<\/i><\/a> <\/i>408 U.S. 238 (1972). The defendant, William Furman, received the death penalty after killing someone in a botched burglary. The Court heard the case with Jackson v. Georgia<\/i> and Branch v. Texas,<\/i> all of which involved questions about the application of the death penalty.<\/p>\n

The Justices ruled 5-4, but there was no majority or even plurality on the reason for the ruling. Instead, the Justices held broadly that the death penalty as it currently existed nationwide was unconstitutional for all capital cases and pointed to:<\/p>\n