Document: 428 U.S. 325 96 S.Ct. 3001 49 L.Ed.2d 974 Stanislaus ROBERTS, Petitioner,v.State of LOUISIANA. No. 75-5844. Argued March 30-31, 1976. Decided July 2, Rehearing Denied Oct. 12, See 429 890, 97 248. Syllabus Petitioner was found guilty first-degree murder and sentenced to death under amended Louisiana statutes enacted after this Court's decision in Furman v. Georgia, 408 238, 92 2726, 33 346. The Supreme Court affirmed, rejecting petitioner's contention that the new procedure for imposing penalty is unconstitutional. post-Furman legislation mandates imposition whenever, with respect five categories homicide (here killing during perpetration an armed robbery), jury finds defendant had a specific intent kill or inflict great bodily harm. If verdict returned, mandated regardless any mercy recommendation. Every instructed on crimes second-degree manslaughter permitted consider those verdicts even if no evidence supports lesser verdicts; returned it treated as acquittal all greater charges. Held: judgment reversed insofar upheld sentence, case remanded. Pp. 331-336; 336; 336-337. La., 319 So.2d 317, Mr. Justice STEWART, POWELL, STEVENS concluded that: 1 1. not per se cruel unusual punishment violative Eighth Fourteenth Amendments. Gregg 153, 168-187, 2909, 2922-2932, 859. P. 331. 2 2. Louisiana's mandatory statute violates 331-336. 3 (a) Though has adopted different somewhat narrower definition than North Carolina, difference constitutional significance, sentence invalid substantially same reasons are detailed Woodson 280, 289-296, 2978, 2984-2988, 944. 331-334. 4 (b) respondent State claims satisfactory procedures comply Furman's requirement standardless discretion be replaced by safeguard against arbitrary capricious sentences, objecve been realized, since responsive-verdict only lacks standards guide selecting among murderers, but plainly invites jurors disregard their oaths choose offense whenever they feel inappropriate. Woodson, at 302-303, 2990-2991. 334-336. 5 BRENNAN concurred stated his dissenting opinion 227, 2971. 336. 6 MARSHALL, being view forbidden Amendments, judgment. ante, 231, 2973 (Marshall, J., dissenting). 7 Anthony G. Amsterdam, Stanford, Cal., petitioners. 8 John L. Hill, Austin, Tex., Texas. 9 James Babin, Lake Charles, Louisiana. 10 By special leave William E. James, Los Angeles, California, amicus curiae. 11 Solicitor Gen. Robert H. Bork, Washington, D. C., United States, 12 Judgment Court, STEVENS, announced STEVENS. 13 question whether crime law 14 * On August 18, 1973, early hours morning, Richard Lowe dead office gas station where he worked. He shot four times head. Four men petitioner, Huey Cormier, Everett Walls, Calvin Arceneaux were arrested complicity murder. petitioner subsequently indicted grand presentment "(d)id unlawfully harm, while engaged robbery Lowe, commit first degree one violation Section One (1) LSA-R.S. 14:30." 15 At trial, testified prosecution. Their testimony established just before midnight 17, discussed Walls Cormier subject "ripping off old man station," morning went pretext seeking employment. After told them there jobs available surreptitiously made way into station, removed pistol from desk drawer. insisted taking possession pistol. When office, assaulted him then shoved small back room. Shortly thereafter car drove up. out and, posing attendant, sold motorist about three dollars' worth gasoline. While still front, heard shots inside station. wenback gone lying bleeding floor. grabbed some empty "money bags" ran. 16 charged. As required state law, trial judge death. affirmed 317 (1975). We granted certiorari, 423 1082, 1091, 47 94 (1976), Amendments States Constitution. II 17 Legislature 1973 relating apparent response 346 (1972). Before these amendments, defined "murder" human offender attempted certain serious felonies, without kill.1 free return verdictss guilty, capital punishment, manslaughter, guilty.2 18 In legislature changed discretionary wholly one, requiring imposed newly revised statute, which charged, convicted, sentenced, provides part when harm aggravated kidnaping, rape, robbery.3 case, responsive now murder, guilty. La.Code Crim.Proc.Ann., Art. 814(A)(1) (Supp.1975). must verdicts, raised requested defendant.4 19 Under former unfettered choice returning either penalty, imprisonment hard labor life.5 determine both conditions existed time killing; robbery, existed, life. Any qualification recommendation might add its such effect.6 III 20 argues circumstances reject argument today IV 21 Louisiana, like responded replacing sentencing cases sentences. present persons treason automatically La.Rev.Stat.Ann. §§ 14:30, 14:42, 14:44, 14:113 (1974). 22 There two major differences between Carolina governing cases. First, includes willful, deliberate, premeditated felony whereas limits connection commission felonies; fireman peace officer performance duties; remuneration; more person; person prior conviction current life sentence.7 Second, employs unique system every provided Arts. 809, 814 (Supp.1975); Cooley, 260 La. 768, 771, 257 400, 401 contrast, instructions included offenses have basis adduced trial. Spivey, 151 N.C. 676, 65 S.E. 995 (1909); cf. Vestal, 283 249, 195 S.E.2d 297 (1973). 23 That controlling significance. history indicates firm societal limiting scope inadequate harshness inflexibility statute. 2984-2987, A large group jurisdictions unacceptable severity common-law rule automatic sentences convictions narrowing homicide. Each approach insufficient substituted 290-292, S.Ct., 2984-2985.8 24 futility attempting solve problems stems our society's rejection belief "every legal category calls identical regard past habits particular offender." Williams New York, 337 241, 247, 69 1079, 1083, 93 L.Ed. 1337 (1949). also Pennsylvania ex rel. Sullivan Ashe, 302 51, 55, 58 59, 60, 82 43 (1937). Justices noted, 19th century movement away rooted recognition "individual culpability always measured committed." U.S., 402, 2810 (Burger, C. joined BLACKMUN, REHNQUIST, JJ., 25 vice lack focus character propensities resolved limitation various killings. diversity presented falling within single killings specified felony, well variety possible offenders involved crimes, underscores rigidity enactment similarity Even other narrowly drawn afford meaningful opportunity consideration mitigating factors attributes individual offender.9 26 fails authority juries This accomplished, according State, deleting jury's pre-Furman case. § 14:30 (1974); 814, 817 (Supp.1975).10 27 system, however, scintilla support verdicts. And, 598 element capriciousness making jurors' power avoid dependent willingness accept invitation judge's instructions. neither annel judgments nor permits review check exercise de facto discretion. 2990-2991.11 28 thus suffers deficiencies similar identified select murderers who will receive appellate decision. upon rejected State's 130 years ago12 renounced lislatures jurisdiction Nation. 291-296, 2985-2987. Amendment, draws much meaning "the evolving decency mark progress maturing society," Trop Dulles, 356 86, 101, 78 590, 598, 630 (1958) (plurality opinion), simply cannot tolerate reintroduction practice so thoroughly discredited. 29 Accordingly, we find set aside. remanded further proceedings inconsistent opinion. 30 It ordered. 31 BRENNAN, concurring 32 For my 2971, 859, I concur sets aside 34 2973, am therefore 35 Chief BURGER, dissenting. 36 dissent forth 375, 2796, 37 WHITE, whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE, REHNQUIST join, 38 effect grades criminal negligent 14:29 (1951). Murder punishable death, (1951); finding empowered foreclose "guilty punishment." 15:409 Following (1972), held effectively invalidated penalty,1 provide homicide: (1974 Supp.). First-degree prescribed situations, including offender, takes another's perpetrating perpetrate robbery. "whoever commits shall punished death," longer authorized punishment.2 39¢sjury rst-degree "responsive verdicts," are: "guilty," second murder," manslaughter," "not guilty." Crim.Proc., (Supp. 1975). 39 issue statutory scheme consistent forbids infliction "cruel punishments" virtue Amendment binding States. Robinson 370 660, 1417, 758 (1962). convinced 40 Texaco service worked attendant. head scen which, turned out, kept manager drawer near cash register. gun later recovered owner bar traced charged indictment alleging "with harm" "while . robbery," killed Lowe. 41 Arceneaux, testifying prosecution, participated taken given said wanted because "always white dude." overpowered, remained outside tend customer. According interval. Another witness, declined participate chance seen hand. third refused participate, come Cormier's house "had filling station." Record 134-135. 42 advising burden proof charge another "specific done accused robbery." elements prove beyond reasonable doubt explained, accordance court explained murder: "The degree, shouldender degree." whereupon instructed: "If you should conclude would your duty degree. 44 manslaughter. 45 Finally, jury: 46 "To summarize, may following verdicts: "1. Guilty 48 "2. "3. 50 "4. Not 51 "Accordingly, proper form each rendered, reminding tt rendered. 52 be: 'We, jury, charged.' 53 murder.' 54 manslaughter.' 55 guilty.' " 56 imposed. appeal, challenge based Amendment. 57 mounts double attack him: too little provision Georgia escape strictures case; second, cri committed conditions, six addressed issue. disagree submissions. insufficiently wake invalidation already said, permissible Dispensing expressly placed uncontrolled breach carrying unanimous verdict; juror, instruction whatever be, vote thereby, persevered, least foreclosing 59 jury-sentencing arrangements force most came less frequently, juries, exercising lawful discretion, seldom freakishly arbitrarily serving legitimate ends justice sought re-enact constitutionally valid redefining crime. 60 To implement aim, eliminated punishment" verdict. Jurors withhold punishment. believe carries sentence. constituting They directed believed Roberts acts, indictment. could not, crime, nevertheless dispense penalty. 61 having spare fundamental. undeniable save contributing factor developments led us invalidate Georgia. eliminate compulsory see it, position overt infirmities 62 Eveno, submits instruct unlimited authorized. difficulty illustrated convict offense. plain instructions, instead, acts court. Only did 662 (1974), repeated So.2d, 322, use contingent charged." Selman, 300 467, 473 (La.1974), cert. pending, 74-6065. 63 true elsewhere, violate despite evidence. But purposes quite unwilling equate raw nullification extended statutes. McGautha 402 183, 91 1454, 711 (1971), vesting unconstitutional Due Process Cuse. arriving judgment, noted emerged "rebellion convicted murderers," Id., 198, 1462, unsatisfactory experience define specify required. Vesting complete upshot. difficulties adverted McGautha, nullification, require felony-murder ground often systematically refuse follow administration obtained 64 Nor vulnerable prosecutor vested selection filing charges, plea bargaining executive clemency. characteristics combined arguably left above, insure applied predecessor statutes, assertion prosecutors fail file charges warrants seek adequate Of course, someone Must what filed whom; essential process nothing rational enforcement sensible operation jusce system. invested appears normal, furnishes inferring prosecuted infrequently reaction pleas confident merely prosecutor's discussed. So too, 944, defendants otherwise tried plead willing testify codefendants. grisly trade, irrational; aimed insuring successful conclusion defendants. Whatever else inexplicable, freakish, condemned provisions Santobello 404 257, 495, 427 (1971); Alford, 400 25, 160, 162 (1970); Parker 397 790, 90 1458, 785 Brady 742, 1463, 747 (1970). Chaffin Stynchcombe, 412 1977, 1984, 714 66 clemency, assume power, exercised governors President II, Constitution, used manner. expect Executive Branch unjustly country's eerience commutation does suggest senseless lottery, operates discriminatory manner, lead reducing theoretical threat luckless few. 67 conclude, do (hereinafter plurality), occur seldom, discriminatorily, satisfy construed 68 agree basic however opposing positions issue, fully canvassed separate opinions able lucid presentations need here. enough Constitution drafted Framers room Fifth "no answer capital, infamous unless Grand Jury "twice put jeopardy limb deprived due law." three-quarters later, likewise enjoined depriving "his life" law. Since very Congress, federal Capital majority t ever Union organized. Until opinions, squarely uphold consistently assumed constitutionality. Wilkerson Utah, 99 130, 345 (1879); re Kemmler, 136 436, 930, 519 (1890); Francis Resweber, 329 459, 374, 422 (1947); Witherspoon Illinois, 391 510, 88 1770, 776 (1968). 99, 597, (1958), Members Warren Black, Douglas, Whittaker agreed "(w)hatever arguments moral grounds terms accomplishing forceful employed throughout history, day widely accepted, concept cruelty." published validity Furman, Justices4 become people country reason, alone reasons, reflect country. supra, 111, 6; Weems 217 349, 378, 544, 553, 793 (1910). argument, accurate time, manner administered then-prevailing schemes, descriptive attitude. Congress legislatures re-enacted crimes.5 All authorize kind With profound mind, say offensive prevailing attitudes presuppositions excessively severe disproportionate imposed.6 These invalidating foreclosed recent events, demonstrating acceptable contemporary community intentional 70 better serves excessive sense legislative social ends. Roberts, contrary, obviously serve end reformation rehabilitation punishing sanctions: incapacitation prisoner, deterrence others, reenforcement retribution. unusual, argued, purposeless needless suffering. 71 widespread re-enactment seems me, answers reprobation clear finally forecloses possibility prisoner not. leaves general principal battleground: Does deter others imprisonment? 72 debate started generations ago progress. side plethora fact position,7 n; yet silenced other. detail conflicting materials, familiar sources. relative efficacy remains matter legislators easily differ. posture wise judicial conclusions indeed efficacious deterrent 73 denigrate vestigial savagery purely retributive motivation; solemn judgments, reasonably based, lives innocent persons. concern values sincere efforts pursue matters greatest moment judiciary reluctant interfere. whether, legislators, supported opposed presently us. here discussion requires interfere served justice. view, warrant overturning grounds. 74 plurality offers additional parties disagree. 75 holds want proceeding aggravating circumstances. issues argued twice Maxwell Bishop, 398 262, 1578, 221 (1970), specifically defendant's "constitutional rights infringed permitting impose standards" determined guilt (not) permissible." 185, 1456. necessity bifurcated reached essentially result Spencer Texas, 385 554, 87 648, 606 (1967). spite cases, sentencer separately record defendant, along offense, exist. myself, reason reconsider failure Held provide. share concluding remarks California: 76 "It American Law Institute National Commission Reform Federal Criminal Laws concluded, trials criteria e superior means dealing retained all. marks guarantee best worlds, accord enlightened ideas students infant science criminology, measure up predilections members Court. fairly conducted guaranteed scrupulously respected. From standpoint impermissible compassionate focusing attention solely determined. 77 "Certainly facts gruesome murders bespeak miscarriage ability unassisted standards, distinguish appropriate sufficient discriminating McGautha's Wilkinson culpable sparing petitioners conducted, until few ago. entitled, entirely fair. Having performed task msuring States' .." 221-222, 1474. 79 Implicit plurality's holding proposition prohibited considering how defined, extraneous related character. Quite apart agree. axiomatic justification deserves considered surely conclusively establishes criminal's Moreover, criminal, likelihood succeed deterring them. Nothing resembling reasoned propositions 80 remaining offered infirm. proved satisfaction historically departs far 81 Although seemingly makes pronouncement, actually stops short whatsoever. Apparently infinite wisdom permit mandate. penalties states again embraced order deem own penological goals. Furthermore, questions affirmative. Once occurs, jury; mandatory. precise questions, Texas distinguishable convict, felonious, "that is, wrong cause excuse." 83 interprets infirm once Yet next breath invalidates invite allow discretion: Despite deserve die, disobey instructns noncapital truly Too strange purports give danger freakish infrequent Louisiana's, believing faithful Florida systems much, brand unbridled 84 event overreads heavily relies. Narrowing reflected growing sentiment many convinced, apparently vest punishments rather nullifications occurring frequency. chose troublesome approaches hardly proves sentencing. preferred go scot-free; events necessarily affirmative preference inference chosen absent nullification. 85 nature burr saddle principle Surely nullifying interrogated everyone's occurred form, them, distinguished itself. though infer opposition critical stubbornly itself resuscitation erosion discretionary-sentencing contrary 86 crimes8 deemed proved, unacceptable; regularity. Perhaps prefer preferences constitutionality Andment refusing Indeed, fundamental objection muddled reasoning 174-176, 2925-2927, lectures length role place proceeds ignore advice, net observers institution pay say. forgotten taught review; fear surrendered temptation make policy attempt govern through misuse powers V impressed reduces mild advice legislators. Weems, Trop, bear witness contrary. 89 foregoing dissent. 405-414, 414, 465, 2796. felonies arson, burglary, simple (1974): "First First being: "(1) kidnapping, rape robbery; "(2) kill, upon, "(3) Where previously unrelated sentence; "(4) (or) "(5) received anything value committing "For Paragraph (2) herein, term include constable, sheriff, deputy local policeman, game warden, officer, jail prison guard, parole probation judge, district attorney, assistant attorney attorneys' investigator. "Whoever death." (In 1975, 14:30(1) burglary predicate La.Acts 327, 1.) Rev.Stat.Ann. 14:30.1 (1974) provides: "Second Second harm; escape, kill. imprisoned eligible parole, suspension period twenty years." increase ineligibility 380.) Code (1967), enumerated Article qualify phrase "without n. 3, supra. limited laws dividing degrees covering defines significant offender. narrow factors, presents problem justify 186, 2931; 287 7, 292-293 2983 2985 25. warranted (La.1974); 471-473 (La.1974). likely reaching verdict, assume, light number take account consequence Those consequences guidance deciding ultimate sanction concerning personal previous defendant. determinations. sufficiency conviction. Brumfield, (La.1975); Evans, 168, 170 278 485, 491 (La.1973). La.Laws 1846, c. 139. Sinclair, 263 377, 268 514 (1972); Poland, 269, Singleton, 267, 220 Williams, 284, 227 Square, 291, 229 294, 231 McAllister, 296, Strong, 298, 232 Marks, 355, 253 Supp.), became effective provided: paragraph "Amended Acts 109, 1." Subsection 1975 "aggravated burglary." concedes, legislation, Supra, "narrowed" range Might inflicted." Brief (emphasis original). Prior (1951), applicable "Murder being, addition (§ 14:42), kidnaping 14:44), 14:113). reenacted 14:42 (1975 Supp.) ), 14:44 ). "There can "First, Parish Calcasieu. "Second, alleged named indictment, "Third, killed, killed. "Fourth, "Fifth, date although necessary exact "Sixth, follows: 'First '(1) ' then, unlawful "Armed 14:64 'Armed theft immediate control another, intimidation, dangerous weapon.' "Theft belongs consent. An deprive permanently essential. "A 'dangerous weapon' 'any gas, liquid substance instrumentality, used, calculated produce harm.' test weapon inherently dangerous, 'in used.' Whether considering: used; (3) referred above. "An intent, mind exists indicate actively desired act act. requisite direct positive evidence, inferred conduct surrounding You to, of, ascertain intended constitute 'specific intent' exist killing. killing, justifiable accident. excuse. "I accompanies act, (harm) formed causes completely day, hour earlier, time." Marshall wrote several independent "it morally history." 360, 2788. "has almost totally 295, 2755, together Brennan summarized Appendix brief 73-7031, Fowler granted, 419 963, 95 223, 177 75-5394, Jurek 2950, 929 decided day. types described analyzed Note, Discretion Constitutionality Death Penalty Statutes, Harv.L.Rev. 1690 California People Anderson, Cal.3d 628, 100 Cal.Rptr. 152, 493 P.2d 880, denied, 406 958, 2060, 344 initiative referendum reinstate (with approximately two-thirds voting approving measure). Cal.Const., I, (effective Nov. 1972). Approximately 64% voters 1968 Massachusetts election voted "yes" asking "Shall commonwealth retain crime?" Commonwealth O'Neal, Mass., 339 N.E.2d 708 (1975) (Reardon, referenda 437-439, 2827 (Powell, dissenting): Oregon (1964), Colorado (1966), Illinois public polls see, g., S.Rep. 93-721, pp. 13-14 reliability strongly criticized, Vidmar & Ellsworth, Public Opinion Penalty, Stan.L.Rev. 1245 Amici rely relevant Amicus Curiae 54. shown Powell's 442-443, 37, 2830, withstood highest courts Post-Furman challenged sustained Oklahoma (E. Davis 542 532 (1975)). Final resolutions awaiting today. Rice Cunningham, Ill.2d 353, 336 (1975), state-law over materials exhaustively 345-354, 2780. intensified then. Part 73-7301, supra (esp. 121-130, App. E, 1e-10e), incorporated reference 34-35 focal point stage Prof. Isaac Ehrlich's study Ehrlich, Deterrent Effect Punishment: Question Life Death, Am.Econ.Rev. (June reactions comments Ehrlich study, Statistical Evidence Punishment, Yale L.J. 164-227 Passell, Penalty: Test, analysis inclusive statistical studies Report Royal 1949-1953, Cmd. 8932, PP 62-67 (1953); Gibbs, Crime, Deterrence, Sw.Soc.Sci.Q. 515 (1968); A. Hart, Principles England Nw.U.L.Rev. 433, 457-458 (1957). Posner, Economic Approach Law, Tex.L.Rev. 757, 766-768 generally, F. Zimring Hawkins, Deterrence (1973), especially 16, 18-19, 31, 62-64, 186-190 (for deterrent). unclear me why, shortcomings try absolute discovered outweigh factors. gives decline adopt scheme, prevent changing minds scheme? think Most murderer preventing removing substantial portion particularly possibly description repealed murders. passed means. relied utterly silent know standards.

Category: 0