Sumner v. Shuman

Last updated

Sumner v. Shuman
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued April 20, 1987
Decided June 22, 1987
Full case nameSumner v. Shuman
Docket no. 86-246
Citations483 U.S. 66 ( more )
Argument Oral argument
Opinion announcement Opinion announcement
Holding
A mandatory death penalty for a prison inmate convicted of murder while serving a life sentence without possibility of parole is unconstitutional.
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr.  · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall  · Harry Blackmun
Lewis F. Powell Jr.  · John P. Stevens
Sandra Day O'Connor  · Antonin Scalia
Case opinions
Per curiam
MajorityO'Connor, joined by Brennan, Marshall, Blackmun, Powell, Stevens
DissentScalia, joined by Rehnquist, White
Laws applied
Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution, Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

Sumner v. Shuman, 483 U.S. 66 (1987), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a mandatory death penalty for a prison inmate who is convicted of murder while serving a life sentence without possibility of parole is unconstitutional. [1] The decision in this case was a significant development in the Court's capital punishment jurisprudence, further clarifying the limits on the application of the death penalty in the United States.

Contents

Background

The case of Sumner v. Shuman arose from the murder of a fellow inmate by Robert Shuman, who was already serving a life sentence without the possibility of parole in a Nevada state prison. Under Nevada law at the time, the imposition of the death penalty was mandatory for inmates convicted of murder while serving a life sentence without parole. [2] Shuman was subsequently convicted of the murder and sentenced to death, as required by the Nevada statute. Appealing his sentence, Shuman argued that the mandatory death penalty imposed in his case violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, as well as the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of due process of law. The case eventually reached the Supreme Court of the United States. [3]

Opinion of the Court

In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court held that the mandatory imposition of the death penalty on inmates convicted of murder while serving a life sentence without the possibility of parole was unconstitutional. Writing for the majority, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor reasoned that the Eighth Amendment requires individualized sentencing in capital cases, allowing for the consideration of mitigating factors related to the defendant's character or the circumstances of the crime.

The Court cited its previous decisions in Woodson v. North Carolina , 428 U.S. 280 (1976), and Lockett v. Ohio , 438 U.S. 586 (1978), which had invalidated mandatory death penalty statutes for similar reasons. The Court reasoned that there was no compelling justification for treating inmates serving life sentences without parole differently from other defendants in capital cases. As a result, the Court held that the Nevada statute violated the Constitution by denying Shuman the opportunity to present mitigating evidence before a jury or judge to potentially avoid a death sentence.

Dissent

Justice Antonin Scalia, joined by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justice Byron White, dissented from the majority opinion. The dissent argued that the Court's decision was inconsistent with its previous decisions upholding mandatory minimum sentences in non-capital cases, as well as with the Court's prior decisions in capital cases.

Impact

The decision in Sumner v. Shuman had a significant impact on the application of the death penalty in the United States, as it further clarified the limits on when and how the death penalty may be imposed. Following the decision, states were required to revise their death penalty statutes to ensure that they provided for individualized sentencing in all capital cases, including those involving inmates serving life sentences without the possibility of parole. [4]

See also

Related Research Articles

Life imprisonment is any sentence of imprisonment for a crime under which convicted criminals are to remain in prison for the rest of their natural lives. Crimes that warrant life imprisonment are usually violent and/or dangerous. Examples of crimes that result in life sentences are murder, torture, terrorism, child abuse resulting in death, rape, espionage, treason, drug trafficking, drug possession, human trafficking, severe fraud and financial crimes, aggravated criminal damage, arson, hate crime, kidnapping, burglary, and robbery, piracy, aircraft hijacking, and genocide.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Capital punishment in the United States</span> Legal penalty in the United States

In the United States, capital punishment is a legal penalty throughout the country at the federal level, in 27 states, and in American Samoa. It is also a legal penalty for some military offenses. Capital punishment has been abolished in 23 states and in the federal capital, Washington, D.C. It is usually applied for only the most serious crimes, such as aggravated murder. Although it is a legal penalty in 27 states, 20 states have the ability to execute death sentences, with the other seven, as well as the federal government, being subject to different types of moratoriums.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Capital punishment in California</span> Legal penalty in the US state of California

In the U.S. state of California, capital punishment is a legal penalty. However it is not allowed to be carried out as of March 2019, because executions were halted by an official moratorium ordered by Governor Gavin Newsom. Prior to the moratorium, executions were frozen by a federal court order since 2006, and the litigation resulting in the court order has been on hold since the promulgation of the moratorium. Thus, there will be a court-ordered moratorium on executions after the termination of Newsom's moratorium if capital punishment remains a legal penalty in California by then.

The U.S. state of Washington enforced capital punishment until the state's capital punishment statute was declared null and void and abolished in practice by a state Supreme Court ruling on October 11, 2018. The court ruled that it was unconstitutional as applied due to racial bias however it did not render the wider institution of capital punishment unconstitutional and rather required the statute to be amended to eliminate racial biases. From 1904 to 2010, 78 people were executed by the state; the last was Cal Coburn Brown on September 10, 2010. In April 2023, Governor Jay Inslee signed SB5087 which formally abolished capital punishment in Washington State and removed provisions for capital punishment from state law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Capital punishment in Maryland</span>

Capital punishment was abolished via the legislative process on May 2, 2013, in the U.S. state of Maryland.

Gregg v. Georgia, Proffitt v. Florida, Jurek v. Texas, Woodson v. North Carolina, and Roberts v. Louisiana, 428 U.S. 153 (1976), is a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court. It reaffirmed the Court's acceptance of the use of the death penalty in the United States, upholding, in particular, the death sentence imposed on Troy Leon Gregg. The set of cases is referred to by a leading scholar as the July 2 Cases, and elsewhere referred to by the lead case Gregg. The court set forth the two main features that capital sentencing procedures must employ in order to comply with the Eighth Amendment ban on "cruel and unusual punishments". The decision essentially ended the de facto moratorium on the death penalty imposed by the Court in its 1972 decision in Furman v. Georgia 408 U.S. 238 (1972). Marshall's dissent famously noted that, "The calculated killing of a human being by the State involves, by its very nature, a denial of the executed person's humanity... An executed person has indeed 'lost the right to have rights."

Capital punishment is a legal penalty in the U.S. state of New Hampshire for persons convicted of capital murder prior to 30 May 2019, when it was abolished prospectively for future crimes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Capital punishment in India</span> Death penalty in India, its states and union territories

Capital punishment in India is a legal penalty for some crimes under the country's main substantive penal legislation, the Indian Penal Code, as well as other laws. Executions are carried out by hanging as the primary method of execution as given under Section 354(5) of the Criminal Code of Procedure, 1973 is "Hanging by the neck until dead", and is imposed only in the 'rarest of cases'.

Mandatory sentencing requires that offenders serve a predefined term of imprisonment for certain crimes, commonly serious or violent offenses. Judges are bound by law; these sentences are produced through the legislature, not the judicial system. They are instituted to expedite the sentencing process and limit the possibility of irregularity of outcomes due to judicial discretion. Mandatory sentences are typically given to people who are convicted of certain serious and/or violent crimes, and require a prison sentence. Mandatory sentencing laws vary across nations; they are more prevalent in common law jurisdictions because civil law jurisdictions usually prescribe minimum and maximum sentences for every type of crime in explicit laws.

Oregon v. Guzek, 546 U.S. 517 (2006), 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 was not introduced during trial. Accordingly, states could constitutionally exclude such evidence from the sentencing phase of a capital trial.

Kansas v. Marsh, 548 U.S. 163 (2006), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a Kansas death penalty statute was consistent with the United States Constitution. The statute in question provided for a death sentence when the aggravating factors and mitigating factors were of equal weight.

Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957 (1991), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States under the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Court ruled that the Eighth Amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause allowed a state to impose a life sentence without the possibility of parole for the possession of 672 grams (23.70 oz) of cocaine.

Kennedy v. Louisiana, 554 U.S. 407 (2008), is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States which held that the Eighth Amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause prohibits the imposition of the death penalty for a crime in which the victim did not die and the victim's death was not intended.

In the United States, life imprisonment is amongst the most severe punishments provided by law, depending on the state, and second only to the death penalty. According to a 2013 study, 1 of every 2,000 inhabitants of the U.S. were imprisoned for life as of 2012.

Lockett v. Ohio, 438 U.S. 586 (1978), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that sentencing authorities must have the discretion to consider at least some mitigating factors, rather than being limited to a specific list of factors.

Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States holding that juvenile offenders cannot be sentenced to life imprisonment without parole for non-homicide offenses.

Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that mandatory sentences of life without the possibility of parole are unconstitutional for juvenile offenders. The ruling applied even to those persons who had committed murder as a juvenile, extending beyond Graham v. Florida (2010), which had ruled juvenile life without parole sentences unconstitutional for crimes excluding murder.

Capital punishment is currently a legal penalty in the U.S. state of Kansas, although it has not been used since 1965.

Montgomery v. Louisiana, 577 U.S. 190 (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that its previous ruling in Miller v. Alabama (2012), that a mandatory life sentence without parole should not apply to persons convicted of murder committed as juveniles, should be applied retroactively. This decision potentially affects up to 2,300 cases nationwide.

Hurst v. Florida, 577 U.S. 92 (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court, in an 8–1 ruling, applied the rule of Ring v. Arizona to the Florida capital sentencing scheme, holding that the Sixth Amendment requires a jury to find the aggravating factors necessary for imposing the death penalty. In Florida, under a 2013 statute, the jury made recommendations but the judge decided the facts.

References

  1. "Sumner v. Nevada Dept. of Prisons, 483 U.S. 66 (1987)". Justia Law. Retrieved September 10, 2022.
  2. "Sumner v. Shuman: Closing the Door on Mandatory Death Sentencing | Office of Justice Programs". www.ojp.gov. Retrieved March 21, 2023.
  3. Marton, Christine (January 1, 1992). "Constitutional Law - Eighth Amendment - Cruel and Unusual Punishment - Proportionality Guarantee". Duquesne Law Review. 30 (2): 387. ISSN   0093-3058.
  4. Cheng, Jesse (2010). "Frontloading Mitigation: The "Legal" and the "Human" in Death Penalty Defense". Law & Social Inquiry. 35 (1): 39–65. doi:10.1111/j.1747-4469.2009.01177.x. ISSN   0897-6546. JSTOR   40539406. S2CID   143955255.