Georgia Case Brief Of Guegg Vs Gregggia

Context and Constitutional Question
Gregg v. Georgia is a court case that started with the “prosecution for a double murder committed in the course of a robbery”(Coenen, 2004). It was a court case among many others involving the issue of the death penalty. The constitutional question that gave Gregg v. Georgia importance was whether “the imposition of the death sentence prohibited under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments as ‘cruel and unusual’ punishment?”(Gregg v. Georgia). The case was basically about if the death penalty violates the 8th and 14th amendment of the constitution because it can be viewed as a punishment that is too cruel or severe, as killing someone over a crime is unusual to some extent. This was the main question of the

One side believed that it was constitutional as it is something that should be used in the “most extreme cases”(Gregg v. Georgia - Case Summary and Case Brief, 2017). They believed that it should be used a deterrence so that criminals may have a second thought to commit a crime as they could be killed if they are caught. The opposite side believed that the death penalty does violate the two amendments. They believed that if the general population were “informed on the morality of capital punishment, they would likely never impose it”(Gregg v. Georgia - Case Summary and Case Brief, 2017). Both sides exhibited the changing tides in society, the older view that it is acceptable, and the newer with a more refined morality deciding it's

Georgia). The decision was 7-2 with Burger, Stewart, White, Blackmun, Powell, Rehnquist, and Stevens were the majority opinion on the case. Brennan and Marshall were the minority opinion. The majority opinion held that “the careful and judicious use of the death penalty may be appropriate if carefully employed”(Gregg v. Georgia). They believed that Georgia’s statutes were fully fair with how they conduct the death penalty as the trial and sentencing is separated and not together allowing for a fair decision and sentencing on the if the death penalty is necessary. And considering that judges rarely used the death penalty they knew that it holds serious weight will only ever be used under extreme circumstances where an extreme punishment is necessary. They also stated that if the prosecution finds “aggravating circumstance”(Coenen, 2004) to call for the death penalty some judges still may not use this punishment if “mitigating evidence”(Coenen, 2004) is found such as abuse as a child making it even harder for the death sentence to be used and therefore, only under specific circumstances will it ever be used. The dissenting opinion, however, held the view that the two main purposes of the death penalty, “general deterrence and retribution”(Gregg v. Georgia - Case Summary and Case Brief, 2017) and that both of the arguments were not strong at