Lockett v. Ohio

The Court's reasoning was based on three arguments:

(1) The Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments require that "in all but the rarest kind of capital [death penalty] case," the sentence be able to take into account the defendant's character and record, as well as any circumstances surrounding the offense that the defendant offers.

(2) After a person has been sentenced to prison, he or she might be offered probation, parole, or work furlough. Thus, even if the sentence were given without regard to the person's individuality, some mechanisms are available to tailor the sentence more exactly to fit the unique circumstances surrounding the person and the crime. In the case of the death penalty, however, these "post-conviction mechanisms" are not available. All the more reason, then, that "each defendant in a capital case [be treated] with the degree of respect due the uniqueness of the individual."

(3) A statute that restricts the sentencer from taking into account the defendant's character and record, as well as the circumstances surrounding the offense, "creates the risk that the death penalty will be imposed in spite of factors that may call for a less severe penalty, and when the choice is between life and death, such risk is unacceptable and incompatible with the commands of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments."