Thompson vs oklahoma essay

In three States parental consent vitiates such prohibition; in six States, no age restrictions are expressed in the statutory provisions authorizing gambling. Moreover, the deterrence rationale for the penalty is equally unacceptable with respect to such offenders, since statistics demonstrate that the vast majority of persons arrested for willful homicide are over 16 at the time of the offense, since the likelihood that the teenage offender has made the kind of cold-blooded, cost-benefit analysis that attaches any weight to the possibility of execution is virtually nonexistent, and since it is fanciful to believe that a year-old would be deterred by the knowledge that a small number of persons his age have been executed during the 20th century.

The plurality takes it to be persuasive evidence that social attitudes have changed to embrace such a prohibition -- changed so clearly and permanently as to be irrevocably enshrined in the Constitution -- that in this century all of the 18 to 20 executions of persons below 16 when they committed crimes occurred before Because the available evidence suggests a national consensus forbidding the imposition of capital punishment for crimes committed before the age of 16, petitioner and others whose crimes were committed before that age may not be executed pursuant to a capital punishment statute that specifies no minimum age.

Doubtless, at some age, a line does exist -- as it has always existed in the common law, see supra at -- below which a juvenile can never be considered fully responsible for murder. It will rarely, if ever, be the case that the Members of this Court will have a better sense of the evolution in views of the American people than do their elected representatives.

In all States but one, year-olds either may not drive, or may drive only with parental consent or accompaniment. See also Woodson v. After Thompson was arrested he underwent psychiatric evaluation to determine whether he was eligible to stand trial as an adult. The petitioner was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to death.

The question really here is whether the certification process negates the need for some focused attention on non-adulthood in relation to the Death Penalty?

What the concurrence proposes is also designed, of course, to make it more difficult for all States to enact legislation resulting in capital punishment for murderers under 16 when they committed their crimes.

Codified Laws A Supp. What the concurrence proposes is obviously designed to nullify, rather than effectuate, the will of the people of Oklahoma, even though the concurrence cannot find that will to be unconstitutional.

V, 1; Ohio Rev. It seems plain to me, in other words, that there is no clear line here, which suggests that the plurality is inappropriately acting in a legislative, rather than a judicial, capacity. Code b 1 Supp. Since this appeal was filed, the Grigsby case has been affirmed by the circuit court, F.

A clinical psychologist who had examined Thompson testified at the second hearing that, in her opinion, Thompson understood the difference between [p] right and wrong, but had an antisocial personality that could not be modified by the juvenile justice system.

Foremost among them, of course, was a reduction [p] in public support for capital punishment in general.

THOMPSON v. OKLAHOMA

Appellate counsel did argue the per se issue. The practices of other nations, particularly other democracies, can be relevant to determining whether a practice uniform among our people is not merely an historical accident, but rather so "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty" that it occupies a place not merely in our mores but, text permitting, in our Constitution as well.

There is, however, complete or near unanimity among all 50 States and the District of Columbia 16 in treating a person under 16 as a minor for several important purposes.

Wayne Thompson was not certified to stand trial as an adult because he had a maturity beyond his years. Nor was it error to admit the photograph of the victim showing the chain wrapped around his legs and a concrete block as that picture was not particularly gruesome.

These facts amply support the conclusion that the murder was heinous, atrocious, or cruel. No close-up views of the body were shown to the jury.

Thompson v. Oklahoma

The Governor of Oklahoma, who can certainly recognize a frustration of the will of the citizens of Oklahoma more readily than we, would certainly have used his pardon power if there was some mistake here. Code b Fla.

Thompson v. Oklahoma - Oral Argument - November 09, 1987 Page 2

It is a time and condition of life when a person may be most susceptible to influence and to psychological damage. And finally, I do not see how the procedural and substantive protections referred to in a provide any precedent for what is done in c.

Between andfor example, 30 women were executed in the United States. As a sociological and moral conclusion, that is implausible; and it is doubly implausible as an interpretation of the United States Constitution. Admitting them into evidence served no purpose other than to inflame the jury.

It would not even have been necessary for the Oklahoma Legislature to act in order to remedy the miscarriage of its intent, if that is what this sentence was. I shot him in the head and cut his throat, and threw him in the river. Our cases sensibly suggest that constitutional rules relating to the maturity of minors must be drawn with an eye to the decision for which the maturity is relevant.

Thompson v Oklahoma 1988 - Essay Example

I am unaware of any national consensus, and the concurrence does not suggest the existence of any, that the death penalty for felons under 16 can only be imposed by a single statute that explicitly addresses that subject. But where there is not first a settled consensus among our own people, the views of other nations, however enlightened the Justices of this Court may think them to be, cannot be imposed upon Americans through the Constitution.

The record does not bear out this allegation. Of the 14 States including the District of Columbia that currently have no death penalty statute, 11 have acquired that status since Code 17B Wis.

We contend that 18 is the most dominant traditional definition of non-adulthood, and in this situation, when you are short of eighteen, the chances Because I think the views of this Court on the policy questions discussed in Part V of the plurality opinion to be irrelevant, I make no attempt to refute them.Audio Transcription for Opinion Announcement - June 29, in Thompson v.

Oklahoma John Paul Stevens: The second case that I have to announce is No.Thompson against Oklahoma, which comes to us from the Court of Criminal Appeals of that State. HAVEN’T FOUND ESSAY YOU WANT? FOR ONLY $/PAGE. GET YOUR CUSTOM ESSAY SAMPLE.

Thompson v. Oklahoma: Debating the Constitutionality of Juvenile Executions I.

THOMPSON v. STATE

INTRODUCTION In what was heralded as the "most important capital punishment. THOMPSON v. STATE OK CR P.2d Case Number: F Decided: 08/29/ Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals. An Appeal from the District Court of Grady County; James R.

Winchester, District Judge. We will write a custom essay sample on Thompson v. Oklahoma specifically for you for only $ $/page. Order now It appears that Thompson bore a grudge against his former brother in law because his sister was being beaten by the former husband.

Thompson was certified and tried as an adult under the Oklahoma Statute, Title 10, Sections. PUBLICATIONS. Stay Informed As a juvenile who resided in Oklahoma, Thompson had a long history of criminal activity and antisocial behavior.

Inhe and three adult companions brutally murdered and mutilated Thompson's brother-in-law. During the fitness hearing, it was determined that Thompson could no longer benefit from the.

Audio Transcription for Opinion Announcement - June 29, in Thompson v. Oklahoma Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - November 09, in Thompson v.

Download
Thompson vs oklahoma essay
Rated 0/5 based on 80 review