Furman v. Georgia Case of 1972
User Rating: 0 / 5
- Details
- Hits: 107130
Furman v. Georgia Case
This case of 1972 at the US Supreme Court featured death sentence. The focus was on the consistency of the death penalty and the ruling on the requirement. Such case sets precedence to other instances after on the requirements and application of death penalty on cases. In the case, William Henry Furman went robbing a residential house. On escape, Furman tripped and fell igniting the gun he had to go on killing somebody (Hausman, 2007). The accused made this statement in court that is reported to be contradictory to the declaration earlier given to the police officers by the defendant. The homeowner was dead from the gunshot, the death was indeed tragic, and now it was a murder charge but nothing less. The killing took place in the middle of a robbery, and the accused could just be executed based on eligibility if found guilty. The court ruled for execution, and as the nature of the sentence was for capital punishment, Furman disputed the ruling and appealed (Stefoff, 2008). He argued that the ruling had no basis and that the penalty could vary from the states and, therefore, lacked substantial definition. Capital punishment is a legal process in the US that allows the governments to execute accused persons charged with serious crimes.
Some states within the US embrace the death sentence with a feeling that those committing strenuous crimes are executed. The case of Furman was under the administrative law and was subjected to rigorous hearing in anticipation of what was constitutional (Hausman, 2007). The accused appealed the ruling of the court in the appellate court arguing that the case decision was not handled in an appropriate manner and that his rights were violated as stipulated in the constitution. The 14th amendment of the United States provides for the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness that Furman argued that he was not granted (Hinds, 2005). A uniform policy that is eligible for death sentencing across the states was not available at the time.
Racial Discrimination a Consideration in the Case Decision
The Supreme Court overturned the sentence arguing that unless a law existed that define those available for execution, such penalty would be disregarded, and consideration of cruelty and unusual punishment pegged (Dalton, & Shatz, n.d). The case of Furman at the Supreme Court was determined together with other two cases of persons who were to be executed. Death receives different considerations in various states of the United States. However, after the verdict on Furman v Georgia, overruling death penalty in the United States made it considered illegal (Hinds, 2005). The sentence, however, came to resurface later, with the Supreme Court declaring the sentence allowable setting conditions for rulings.
Furman was an African American, and according to his attorney, people of color and the poor commonly receive the death penalty for capital offenses. This case implied that the race of the accused might have influenced the decision of the court to grant the death penalty (Carter, & Mazzula, 2013). The judges applied the stipulation of the Constitution in the determination of the case. At the time the Supreme Court was determining the legality of mortality sentence, the amendment to the constitution were used (Garces, & Jayakumar, 2015). Thoughts are that the sentence of the whites was different as compared to the colored people for similar offenses as the case in mention involved a black. While in the interpretation of the constitution, there is no favor served to an individual if such favor does not manifest. An equal protection clause dictates similar service to people without the favor of which a double standard would violate.
In the argument of the attorney, it is evident that the systems preferred other people better than the rest (Carter, & Mazzula, 2013). The rates at which the blacks were served with death penalties were vastly disproportionate with that of their white counterparts accused of the same crimes, particularly the affluent and the influential.
Applications and Examples of the Case
The case has constitutional significance, and its applicability has continued over the years. The basis of the matter is the determination of the constitutionality of death sentence for capital crimes. Amendment 8 of the Constitution bars cruel punishment that is not usual, and that which is thought to be cruel is avoided. Section 14 of the bill on the other hand stipulated equal treatment of persons irrespective of their difference across America. The accused in Furman v. Georgia as an African American was favored by the application of Amendment 14 to ensure they receive equality and fairness (Garces, & Jayakumar, 2015). The case stalled death penalties within the state and that which was seen to be targeting other people than the rest.
The case set precedence in the determination of death sentence and the constitutionality of the punishment. The legislation and the courts had to rethink in a manner that the penalty would be administered in a non-discriminatory way. States enacted new death penalty laws to respond to the court's concern on the arbitration of death penalties. For instance, in 2011 the Carr brothers’ death penalty granted because they were accused of murdering five people was overturned (Hausman, 2007). Even though there was discontentment from critiques, the case was reversed, and the count of the capital offenses dropped (Oshinsky, 2010).
The Decision
The legal question that was before the jury at the Supreme Court was whether it was legal imposing death penalties for the cases as they were presented. The jury sat, contemplated, and arrived at voting after examining the case. The case met the threshold for being overturned and termed illegal after a 5-4 outcome of the process (Stefoff, 2008). The court based their argument on the lack of uniformity of the judgment of such cases as expressed by the attorney of the accused. On another hand, the court realized that there were loopholes in the constitution.
In the ruling, there were different opinions that were brought about touching the disproportionate manner in which their white counterparts sentenced the blacks to death. It was also realized that there was need for a policy that explains the applicability of such penalty in capital crimes and the manner in which it can be applied appropriately (Oshinsky, 2010). There was a feeling by the recent judges that the Constitution implicitly supported the convictions and that they were justified. Their counterparts, however, turned down the sentence arguing that the rights of the accused were violated.
I agree with the ruling of the Supreme Court in that there has to be a proper stipulated manner in which the sentence will be served to people appropriately. The penalties have to administer based on the crime and not in a way favoring one group to another. All the rights enjoyed by the accused have to be determined, and the courts ensure that they are not violated in the event where the death penalties would be served (Hausman, 2007).