Gregg v. Georgia

Supreme Court of United States
428 U.S. 153 (1976)

ELI5:

Rule of Law:

The death penalty for the crime of murder is not, in and of itself, a cruel and unusual punishment that violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. A capital sentencing statute can be constitutional if it provides clear, objective standards to guide the sentencing authority's discretion, includes a bifurcated trial, and guarantees automatic appellate review of the sentence's proportionality.

Facts:

Troy Gregg and his companion, Floyd Allen, were hitchhiking in Florida when they were picked up by Fred Simmons and Bob Moore.
During the trip, Simmons, who was carrying a large amount of cash, purchased a new car.
After dropping off another hitchhiker in Atlanta, the four men stopped for a rest stop along a highway in Gwinnett County, Georgia.
Gregg shot Simmons and Moore, killing them both.
Gregg then robbed the victims of their valuables and fled with Allen in the victims' car.
When arrested, Gregg was in possession of the murder weapon and cash from the robbery.
Gregg later signed a statement admitting to the shootings and robbery, but claimed at trial that he had acted in self-defense.
Allen's account, which police stated Gregg had confirmed, indicated that Gregg planned the robbery and shot the victims in cold blood as they returned to the car.

Procedural Posture:

Troy Gregg was charged with two counts of armed robbery and two counts of murder in a Georgia trial court.
In the guilt phase of a bifurcated trial, a jury found Gregg guilty on all four counts.
In the penalty phase, the same jury recommended the death penalty on all four counts, finding two statutory aggravating circumstances for the murders: that they were committed during another capital felony (robbery) and for the purpose of receiving money and a car.
Gregg appealed his convictions and sentences to the Supreme Court of Georgia.
The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the murder convictions and the two corresponding death sentences.
The Georgia Supreme Court vacated the death sentences for the armed robbery convictions, holding they were disproportionate to penalties imposed in similar robbery cases.
The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari, limited to the challenge to the death sentences for murder.

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does the imposition of the death penalty for the crime of murder under Georgia's statutory scheme, which requires a bifurcated trial, specific jury findings of aggravating circumstances, and automatic appellate review, violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments' prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment?

Opinions:

Majority - Justice Stewart, joined by Justice Powell and Justice Stevens

No. The imposition of the death penalty for the crime of murder under Georgia's revised statutory scheme does not violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments because it provides objective standards to guide, regularize, and make rationally reviewable the process for imposing a sentence of death. The death penalty is not a per se violation of the Constitution, as it has deep historical roots and is supported by contemporary societal standards, evidenced by the 35 state legislatures that re-enacted capital punishment statutes after Furman v. Georgia. The concerns in Furman were about the arbitrary and capricious application of the death penalty, not the punishment itself. Georgia's statute addresses these concerns by implementing a bifurcated proceeding, requiring the jury to find at least one specific statutory aggravating circumstance before considering death, allowing consideration of mitigating circumstances, and mandating automatic appellate review by the Georgia Supreme Court to ensure proportionality and prevent arbitrary application. This structured process channels the jury's discretion and provides safeguards against the 'wanton' and 'freakish' imposition of death condemned in Furman.

Concurring - Justice White, joined by Chief Justice Burger and Justice Rehnquist

No. The Georgia capital sentencing scheme is constitutional because it avoids the constitutional defects identified in Furman. The statutory framework narrows the class of murders eligible for the death penalty to particularly serious crimes by requiring the finding of an aggravating circumstance. The most critical feature is the appellate review by the Georgia Supreme Court, which is tasked with ensuring that the death penalty is not applied in a discriminatory, standardless, or rare fashion for any given class of crime. This review process provides a check on jury discretion and ensures that death sentences are proportional to those imposed in similar cases, thus curing the wanton and freakish application condemned in Furman. The argument that unchecked prosecutorial discretion makes the system arbitrary is rejected, as such discretion is a necessary component of the criminal justice system.

Concurring - Justice Blackmun

No. Concurs in the judgment, referencing his dissenting opinion in Furman v. Georgia, which argued that the death penalty is not per se unconstitutional.

Dissenting - Justice Brennan

Yes. The death penalty violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments under all circumstances. The fundamental flaw in capital punishment is that it treats human beings as 'nonhumans, as objects to be toyed with and discarded,' which is inconsistent with the core principle of human dignity that underlies the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause. Procedural safeguards, no matter how elaborate, cannot cure the inherent cruelty and degradation of the state deliberately extinguishing a human life. The focus should not be on the procedures for imposing death, but on the essence of the punishment itself, which is morally intolerable in a civilized society.

Dissenting - Justice Marshall

Yes. The death penalty is a per se cruel and unusual punishment. Reiterating his concurrence in Furman, the death penalty is unconstitutional for two primary reasons: it is an excessive penalty that serves no penological purpose more effectively than life imprisonment, and the American people, if fully informed about its realities, would reject it as morally unacceptable. The legislative response to Furman does not change this analysis, as the public remains largely uninformed. The retributive justification for the death penalty is fundamentally at odds with the Eighth Amendment's requirement that punishment comport with the 'basic concept of human dignity.'

Analysis:

Gregg v. Georgia is a landmark decision that effectively reinstated the death penalty in the United States, ending the de facto moratorium established by Furman v. Georgia four years earlier. The case clarified that Furman did not outlaw capital punishment itself, but rather condemned the arbitrary and unguided sentencing procedures then in use. By approving Georgia's 'guided discretion' model, the Court established the constitutional blueprint for modern capital punishment statutes, requiring bifurcated trials, the consideration of aggravating and mitigating circumstances, and meaningful appellate review. This decision shifted the constitutional focus from whether the death penalty is permissible to how it must be administered to be constitutional, shaping capital jurisprudence for decades to come.

Gunnerbot

AI-powered case assistant

Loaded: Gregg v. Georgia (1976)

Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"