The subject of capital punishment, or the death penalty, has long been a topic of national debate. Some feel it is a necessary deterrent to crime, while others believe it is morally reprehensible. Capital punishment can be enforced on the national level, as well as on the state level. However, at the state level it is up to each state to define the rules surrounding the use and methods associated with the death penalty.

Some say that the death penalty is a form of cruel and unusual punishment, which is prohibited by the Eighth Amendment. The case of Robinson v. California (1962) explored the issue of cruel and unusual punishment. A California law stated that it was illegal to "be addicted to the use of narcotics" and required a punishment of 90 days of incarceration. Lawrence Robinson was convicted of being addicted to narcotics and sentenced to the required prison time. Robinson appealed, claiming that the law was a form of cruel and unusual punishment and, therefore, unconstitutional. The Court held that laws imprisoning persons afflicted with the "illness" of narcotic addiction inflicted cruel and unusual punishment and violated the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. However, because the Eighth Amendment does not define what constitutes cruel and unusual punishment, The Supreme Court has been reluctant to rule on the controversial issue of whether or not capital punishment is constitutional.

The Supreme Court case of Furman v. Georgia (1972) examined the link between cruel and unusual punishment and the death penalty. Furman was breaking into a house, and a resident came home, startling him. While Furman was trying to escape, he tripped and his gun fired accidentally. The inadvertent shot killed one of the residents. Furman was tried for the murder, found guilty, and was sentenced to death. Furman appealed, claiming that the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The resulting Supreme Court decision produced an extremely long opinion, with all nine justices writing a separate opinion on the subject of cruel and unusual punishment.

The Supreme Court struck down all state laws allowing the death penalty, not because it considered the death penalty cruel and unusual punishment, but because they gave too much discretion to judges and juries in deciding whether to impose the death penalty. It stated that the imposition of Georgia's death penalty law was "freakish" and too "random." The Court held that states must use stronger guidelines in administrating the death penalty. Following the decision, Congress and 38 states re-wrote and passed new capital punishment laws. Some states made the criteria for execution more concrete, calling for mandatory death penalty for crimes such as first-degree murder. Other states adopted a two-trial system: one trial for determining innocence or guilt and one trial for sentencing.

One state that opted to impose capital punishment for certain crimes was North Carolina, which enacted legislation that made the death penalty mandatory for all convicted first-degree murderers. In Woodson v. North Carolina (1976), the court convicted James Woodson of first-degree murder and automatically sentenced him to death. Woodson appealed, asking the Supreme Court to consider if the mandatory death penalty law violated his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The Court determined that removing sentencing discretion is "cruel and unusual" and that a mandatory death penalty rule is too rigid and unworkable.

Conversely, the Supreme Court case Gregg v. Georgia (1976) upheld states' rights to impose capital punishment, so long as sentencing is reached separately from determining guilt. Troy Gregg was convicted of armed robbery and murdering two men and was sentenced to death. He appealed on the grounds that execution is cruel and unusual punishment. The Court disagreed with Gregg, stating that the careful and judicious use of the death penalty can be applied if the crime is outrageously vile, horrible, and inhuman. The Court's ruling also approved the system of two trials. In fact, the Court praised the Georgia law and set it as a model for other states to follow.

Copyright 2006 The Regents of the University of California and Monterey Institute for Technology and Education