Opinion ID: 2301325
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: unconstitutionally low rate of imposition

Text: Defendant contends that because the death-sentencing rate in New Jersey continues to fall and executions are seldomly upheld, the death penalty statute violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. We have consistently rejected that argument, Harvey III, supra, 159 N.J. at 319-20, 731 A. 2d 1121; Chew II, supra, 159 N.J. at 220-21, 731 A. 2d 1070; Cooper II, supra, 159 N.J. at 115-16, 731 A. 2d 1000; Loftin II, supra, 157 N.J. at 345, 724 A. 2d 129; DiFrisco III, supra, 142 N.J. at 210, 662 A. 2d 442; Martini II, supra, 139 N.J. at 79-80, 651 A. 2d 949; Bey IV, supra, 137 N.J. at 396, 645 A. 2d 685; Marshall II, supra, 130 N.J. at 188-95, 613 A. 2d 1059, and do so again today. As we first remarked in Marshall II, supra, 130 N.J. at 194, 613 A. 2d 1059, the low rate at which the death sentence is imposed in New Jersey reveals that juries are fulfilling the Legislature's wish that the death penalty be reserved for a small segment of the death-eligible cases.