Lockett v. Ohio - Significance, Did She Deserve To Die?, Deciding Who Shall Die, The Mitigating Factors, The Evidence A Defendant Can Present
State of Ohio
That the Ohio death penalty statute--which limited the number of mitigating factors that a judge passing sentence could take into account--was unconstitutional.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Anthony G. Amsterdam
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Carl M. Layman III
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, Warren E. Burger (writing for the Court), Thurgood Marshall, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., John Paul Stevens, Potter Stewart
William H. Rehnquist, Byron R. White (William J. Brennan, Jr. did not participate)
Date of Decision
3 July 1978
That the death penalty is so severe, it requires greater reliability than other penalties, and so statutes that limit the mitigating factors that a sentencer may take into account are indeed violations of the Eighth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment.
- United States v. Jackson, 390 U.S. 570 (1968).
- Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 (1968).
- Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972).
- Smith v. North Carolina, 459 U.S. 1056 (1982).
- Jones v. Illinois, 464 U.S. 920 (1983).
- Straight v. Wainwright, 476 U.S. 1132 (1986).
- Darden v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 168 (1986).
West's Encyclopedia of American Law. St. Paul, MN: West Group, 1998.
Knappman, Edward W. Great American Trials. Detroit, MI: Visible Ink Press, 1994.
- Mahan v. Howell - Significance, What Is The Percentage?, Home-port Or Home Address?, Flexibility And Local Control
- Leonard Peltier Trial: 1977 - Arrest, Escape, Extradition, "it Was The Agents â€¦", Myrtle Poor Bear Irrelevant, Appeals Denied
- Lockett v. Ohio - Further Readings
- Lockett v. Ohio - Significance
- Lockett v. Ohio - Did She Deserve To Die?
- Lockett v. Ohio - Deciding Who Shall Die
- Lockett v. Ohio - The Mitigating Factors
- Lockett v. Ohio - The Evidence A Defendant Can Present
- Lockett v. Ohio - Mitigating Circumstances
- Lockett v. Ohio - Knapp Brothers Murder Trials
- Other Free Encyclopedias