Lockett v. Ohio
| Lockett v. Ohio | |
|---|---|
|
|
| Argued January 17, 1978 Decided July 3, 1978 |
|
| Full case name | Lockett v. Ohio |
| Citations | 438 U.S. 586 (more) |
| Holding | |
| The Ohio statute violated the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments in failing to require consideration of all mitigating factors surrounding the accused murderer before coming to the decision to apply the death penalty. | |
| Court membership | |
|
|
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Burger, joined by Stewart, Powell, Stevens; White, Blackmun, Rehnquist (parts I and II) |
| Concurrence | Blackmun (in part) |
| Concurrence | Marshall (in judgment) |
| Concur/dissent | White |
| Concur/dissent | Rehnquist |
| Brennan took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amends. VIII, XIV | |
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.
An Ohio law required that the death penalty was mandatory for felons convicted of aggravated murder unless the victim had induced the offense, the offense was committed under duress or coercion, or the offense was a product of mental deficiencies. Sandra Lockett, the driver of the getaway car for a robbery that resulted in the murder of a pawnshop owner, was found guilty under the Ohio statute and sentenced to death.
Does the Ohio statute requiring the death penalty for felons convicted of aggravated murder violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments by limiting the consideration of mitigating factors?
With a 7-1 decision in favor of Lockett, Justice Burger wrote the opinion for the majority. The Court held that the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments required, in all but the rarest cases, that sentencers consider all mitigating factors surrounding the accused murderer before coming to the decision of applying the death penalty. These mitigating factors include, "a defendant's character or record and any circumstances of the offense proffered as a reason for a sentence less than death." Justice Burger, joined by Justice Stewart, Justice Powell and Justice Stevens concluded that "the limited range of mitigating circumstances that may be considered by the sentencer under the Ohio death penalty statute is incompatible with the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments." Pp. 438. The Court cited Gregg, 428 U.S. at 428 U. S. 206 when the Court had previously approved of a statute that permitted the jury to "consider any aggravating or mitigating circumstances" to support their decision in Lockett
...
Wikipedia