Opinion ID: 1133126
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Whether Fifth Penalty Trial Will Constitute Cruel or Unusual Punishment

Text: [3] Defendant also contends that subjecting him to any further penalty trials will constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the federal Constitution. A similar contention was rejected in Purvis v. California, 234 F. Supp. 147, 151. In that case the petitioner sought to prevent the holding of a fourth penalty trial after he had three times obtained reversal of the death penalty because of misconduct of the prosecutor. The court stated in part that As a general proposition having to sit through a trial may be an onerous burden for a defendant, but it is not a cruel and certainly not an unusual punishment. The court also stated that Certainly the California authorities should now be on notice that there is a constitutional limit to the number of times a man must undergo a trial where his life is at stake, and where one of the reasons for the repeated trials is deliberate misconduct by the prosecutor. The court, however, did not regard the fourth penalty trial as exceeding that limit. In the instant case, where deliberate misconduct has not been a factor in the reversal of penalty trials, a fifth penalty trial will not constitute such punishment.