Constitutional Law Case Briefs Facts: Furman, joined with the cases Jackson v. Georgia and Branch v. Texas, was granted certiorari and heard collectively by the Court.
Background[ edit ] In the Furman v. Georgia case, the resident awoke in the middle of the night to find William Henry Furman committing burglary in his house. At trial, in an unsworn statement allowed under Georgia criminal procedure, Furman said that while trying to escape, he tripped and the weapon he was carrying fired accidentally, killing the victim.
This contradicted his prior statement to police that he had turned and blindly fired a shot while fleeing. In either event, because the shooting occurred during the commission of a felony, Furman would have been guilty of murder and eligible for the death penalty under then-extant state law, Furman v georgia to the felony murder rule.
|Furman v. Georgia||The question presented in these cases is whether death is today a punishment for crime that is "cruel and unusual" and consequently, by virtue of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, beyond the power of the State to inflict.|
Furman was tried for murder and was found guilty based largely on his own statement. Although he was sentenced to death, the punishment was never carried out. Georgia, like Furman, was also a death penalty case confirmed by the Supreme Court of Georgia. Unlike Furman, however, the convicted man in Jackson had not killed anyone, but attempted to commit armed robbery and committed rape in the process of doing so.
Like Jackson, Branch was convicted of rape. There was no opinion of the court or plurality as none of the five justices constituting the majority joined in the opinion of any other.
Douglas expressed similar concerns about the apparent arbitrariness with which death sentences were imposed under the existing laws, often indicating a racial bias against black defendants.
Because these opinions were the narrowest, finding only that the death penalty as currently applied was cruel and unusual, they are often considered the controlling majority opinions. These death sentences are cruel and unusual in the same way that being struck by lightning is cruel and unusual.
For, of all the people convicted of rapes and murders in andmany just as reprehensible as these, the petitioners are among a capriciously selected random handful upon whom the sentence of death has in fact been imposed. My concurring Brothers have demonstrated that, if any basis can be discerned for the selection of these few to be sentenced to death, it is the constitutionally impermissible basis of race.
FloridaU. I simply conclude that the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments cannot tolerate the infliction of a sentence of death under legal systems that permit this unique penalty to be so wantonly and so freakishly imposed.
Justices William Brennan and Thurgood Marshall concluded that the death penalty was in itself "cruel and unusual punishment," and incompatible with the evolving standards of decency of a contemporary society. Powelland William H. Rehnquisteach appointed by President Richard Nixondissented.
They argued that a punishment provided in 40 state statutes at the time and by the federal government could not be ruled contrary to the so-called "evolving standard of decency. Congress to rethink their statutes for capital offenses to ensure that the death penalty would not be administered in a capricious or discriminatory manner.
Several statutes that mandated bifurcated trials, with separate guilt-innocence and sentencing phases, and imposing standards to guide the discretion of juries and judges in imposing capital sentences, were upheld in a series of Supreme Court decisions inled by Gregg v.
Other statutes enacted in response to Furman, such as Louisiana's which mandated imposition of the death penalty upon conviction of a certain crime, were struck down in cases of that same year.Gregg v. Georgia, Proffitt v. Florida, Jurek v.
Texas, The decision essentially ended the de facto moratorium on the death penalty imposed by the Court in its decision in Furman v.
Georgia U.S. (). Background. All five cases share the same basic procedural history. Georgia and Branch v.
Texas, was granted certiorari and heard collectively by the Court. Furman was found guilty of murder while the other two appellants were convicted of . Verified answers contain reliable, trustworthy information vouched for by a hand-picked team of experts. Brainly has millions of high quality answers, all of them carefully moderated by our most trusted community members, but verified answers are the finest of the finest/5(5).
Georgia and Branch v. Texas, was granted certiorari and heard collectively by the Court. Furman was found guilty of murder while the other two appellants were convicted of rape by their courts of original jurisdiction.
The Background of Furman v. Georgia () In the midst of robbing a home, the owner of the home was awakened by the individual undertaking the robbery - William Henry Furman; in an attempt to escape, Furman proceeded to flee.
Furman was burglarizing a private home when a family member discovered him. He attempted to flee, and in doing so tripped and fell. The gun that he was carrying went off and killed a resident of the home.