ipl-logo

Summary Of The Supreme Court Case Of Payne V. Tennessee

734 Words3 Pages

1) Name and citation of case (5%)
Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808 (1991)
2) Judicial history (5%)
Payne was the defendant, who was convicted by the trial court. Payne was convicted for two counts of first degree murder and one count for assault in the first degree of attempted murder. Payne was sentenced to death. Payne appealed the sentence to the Supreme Court of Tennessee. Payne asserted that the victim’s impact statement violated his Eight Amendment right. The Supreme Court of Tennessee upheld his sentence. Payne also appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld Payne’s sentence.
3) Facts (20%)
On June 1987, Pervis Tyrone Payne, spent his morning and afternoon drinking alcohol and injecting cocaine into himself. Payne …show more content…

Tennessee, the use of the victim’s impact statement does not violate the Eighth Amendment. The courts allow a defendant to use mitigating factors in order to describe the circumstances surrounding the incident in question therefore the prosecution should be prevented. because it is mitigating the defendant’s factor to describe the circumstance of the incident in question therefore the prosecution should not be bar from using mitigating factors such as victim impact statements. Since the victim’s impact statement did not violate the Eighth Amendment, Payne’s case led to the overruling of prior case law. The court ruled that since there are no restriction place of mitigating by the defendant there should be no use for the prosecution. The compliance of the evidence that relates to the damage caused by the victim’s death. The court ruled that since there was no restrictions on the use mitigating factors by the defendant, there should be no restrictions placed on the prosecution. The use of evidence regarding the abuse caused by a defendant is element of the case that determines the reasonable punishment. The use of the victim’s impact statement is another way to inform the authority about the abuse caused by the

Open Document