{"id":352316,"date":"2024-01-05T13:02:13","date_gmt":"2024-01-05T18:02:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/content.findlaw-admin.com\/ability-law\/criminal\/criminal-procedure\/temporary-abolition-of-the-death-penalty.html"},"modified":"2024-01-05T13:02:13","modified_gmt":"2024-01-05T18:02:13","slug":"temporary-abolition-of-the-death-penalty","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.findlaw.com\/criminal\/criminal-procedure\/temporary-abolition-of-the-death-penalty.html","title":{"rendered":"Temporary Abolition of the Death Penalty"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n \n
\n

Temporary Abolition of the Death Penalty<\/h1>\n
\n
\n By John Mascolo, Esq.<\/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

In 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court, in the case of Furman v. Georgia<\/i>, imposed a temporary abolition of the death penalty. The case was unusual in that it commuted the sentence of hundreds of death-row prisoners to life imprisonment. <\/p>\n\n <\/div>\n\n

The death penalty has been controversial throughout our country’s history. Many death penalty challenges<\/a> tried to end its use at various times.<\/p>\r\n

The majority of states then revised their death penalty statutes. In 1976, the Court approved the laws in Georgia and two other states. The death penalty returned to the majority of states.<\/p>\r\n

Despite the return of the death penalty, challenges arose time and again. Today, although 27 states maintain the death penalty in their laws, six of those states and the federal government are under a moratorium on its use.<\/p>\r\n

This article will look at what was behind the temporary abolition of the death penalty in 1972 and its relation to today’s bans at the federal level and in individual states.<\/p>\r\n

Death Penalty Ban<\/h2>\r\n

In the landmark case Furman v. Georgia<\/i><\/a>, <\/i>the petitioners’ claim focused on the arbitrary and discriminatory use of the death penalty in the states at issue. Furman<\/i> involved the Supreme Court’s consideration of three cases raising similar claims. By a vote of 5-4, the Court said that death penalty statutes in Georgia and Texas, giving the jury unbridled discretion in sentencing, could result in arbitrary sentencing. The five justices in the majority wrote five separate opinions. So, it was difficult to remove a new rule of law from the case. Most scholars conclude that most agreed that the criminal procedure for capital cases was deficient under state law. It did not give enough rational safeguards to guide a trial court or jury in sentencing. The Court maintained that the statutory scheme in Georgia and Texas was arbitrary and offended due process in its application. It was "cruel and unusual" and violated the Eighth Amendment<\/a> of the U.S. Constitution.<\/p>\r\n

As a result, with Furman<\/i>, the Court voided state death penalty statutes, commuting the sentences of over 600 death row inmates in the United States. Its ruling put in place a temporary abolition of the death penalty. Existing state statutes were like Georgia and Texas and were no longer valid.<\/p>\r\n

Return Of The Death Penalty<\/h2>\r\n

Georgia was again at the center of the death penalty controversy with another group of criminal cases heard in the Supreme Court in Gregg v. Georgia<\/i><\/a> <\/i>in 1976. In Gregg<\/i>, the petitioners asked the Supreme Court to declare capital punishment as cruel and unusual punishment, violating the Eighth Amendment. The Court reviewed death sentences issued under new state laws passed since the Furman <\/i>decision. The Court upheld the revised statutes in Georgia, Florida, and Texas. In a 7-2 decision, it re-established the death penalty as constitutional under the Eighth Amendment when the law properly guides the discretion of the trial judge or jury making the decision. In a separate case, it overturned state criminal laws that called for a mandatory death sentence after a capital conviction.<\/p>\r\n

Since Gregg<\/i>, state statutes should meet two basic requirements to prevent any future finding that the use of the death penalty was cruel and unusual.<\/p>\r\n

    \r\n
  1. Sentencing in death penalty cases must be based on objective criteria to direct and limit the exercise of discretion<\/li>\r\n
  2. The law must permit the sentencing judge or jury to adequately consider the defendant’s character before making their decision. For example, the defense may offer the non-existence of a criminal record as a mitigating factor.<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\n

    In Gregg, <\/i>the states had set up bifurcated court proceedings. In the first stage, the trial stage<\/i>, the judge or jury determines the guilt or innocence of the capital crime. If the jury finds the defendant guilty, the case proceeds to a sentencing stage<\/i>. In that stage, they must find beyond a reasonable doubt one or more aggravating circumstances outlined in the statute to recommend a death sentence. At this stage, the state presents evidence of aggravating circumstances. The defense presents evidence of mitigating circumstances. Mitigating circumstances may lead the jury to vote for a life sentence rather than death. If the jury finds both aggravating and mitigating circumstances, it must decide if the aggravating circumstances outweigh the mitigating ones and support a death sentence. In Georgia, the Court noted and approved that the appeals process in such cases permitted an automatic appeal directly to the state supreme court.<\/p>\r\n

    The Court’s Evolving Standards Post-Gregg<\/h2>\r\n

    States continued to revise their statutes<\/a> after Gregg<\/i> to conform with the Court’s ruling. Yet, the Supreme Court did not abandon the concept that its interpretation of the Eighth Amendment could evolve. In a series of decisions, it has addressed conflicts in the appellate courts and removed categories of defendants from a death sentence. It continues to refine case law in some areas. For example, mental illness comes in degrees. Some states have struggled to set standards for when an execution of a mentally ill person can go forward. As a result, these cases often make their way through the courts.<\/p>\r\n

    The following list provides some key Supreme Court rulings since Gregg<\/i>:<\/p>\r\n