In the the Supreme Court case Gregg Vs. Georgia, Justice Stewart concluded that “We now hold that the punishment of death does not invariably violate the Constitution.” (GREGG v. GEORGIA, 1976), answering the question of whether or not capital punishment is ever unconstitutional. Some may argue that Stewart is saying that the death penalty is sometimes considered constitutional, however, it is important to note that if we as Americans don’t enforce the constitutional rights of human beings at all times, the foundation of our nation will slowly begin to lose its strength. If in any way something can be declared as unconstitutional, then from there on out it will never fall into the realm of being constitutional. The Court has to come face to face with the claim that the administration of death, regardless of the offense, is a cruel and unusual punishment, is morally unethical for the government to be conducting, and is a violation of the Constitution.
Capital punishment has long been a heavily debated issue. In his article, “The Rescue Defence of Capital Punishment,” author Steve Aspenson make a moral argument in favor of capital punishment on the grounds that that is the only way to bring about justice and “rescue” murder victims. Aspenson argues as follows:
The case starts with the arrest of Clarence Earl Gideon who was charged with breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor. Gideon was a runaway, having left home around eighth grade he became a drifter. He wandered around from place to place and spent time in and out of prison of prison for many non-violent crimes. He eventually found some part time work at a pool club, the same club room he was accused of breaking into and robbing.
Clarence Earl Gideon was not someone you would expect to be a hero. According to www.uscourts.gov, he left school after the 8th grade and decided to run away from home. “He was mostly a drifter, spending time in and out of prison for nonviolent crimes,” their website reads. When he was 51 years old, he was accused of breaking into a bar in Florida and arrested. He was too poor to afford a lawyer, so when he got to court, he asked the judge to appoint him one, according to his rights under the Sixth Amendment. The judge refused, and he had to represent himself. “He made an opening statement to the jury, cross-examined the prosecution 's witnesses, brought witnesses in his own defense, declined to testify himself, and made arguments emphasizing
Some say mental illness is an invisible disease, one that begins to eat someone from the inside out. Being mentally ill comes in many different forms: from basic depression and anxiety, to schizophrenia and depersonalization. These disorders can make a person feel as though they are losing control over what they are doing, as well as losing sight on what makes them normal. Mental illness can make a person do things that a normal person would not do, simple because of a person 's moral and ethical values. Sometimes, however, a person who is mentally ill commits crimes that are unforgivable. So, in lieu of these crimes, does that mean that the mentally ill should be punished, to the extremes of the death penalty, or should they be forced into
When people think of how government works, unless they’ve taken a government class, they usually think of Congress making laws and the President doing pretty much everything else. No one pays much attention to the Supreme Court unless there is a landmark case or something else to grab the news — like the recent death of Justice Antonin Scalia. But the Supreme Court does much more than you’d think regarding keeping the political machine running like a well-oiled … machine. Through not only interpretation of the law, but also judicial activism, the Supreme Court shows it can have as much influence over the laws of the land as either of the other branches of the federal government. In this paper, I will analyze the decision-making methods of the Court using the cases of Gideon v. Wainwright and Betts v. Brady.
How would you feel if you were on death row awaiting the inevitable? Would you feel as though you are deserving of this punishment or deserve the chance to live? As of January 1st, 2018 over 2,700 inmates are on death row. This means that they will be put to death at some point in the future. Many inmates are often on death row for more than a year which gives them time to reflect on what they have done and the pain it caused. Being on death row often prolongs the pain for the inmate. They spend their time in prison fearing the inevitable which for them is death. Today, we live in a society that is very divided on this issue. There are many in support of the death penalty, suggesting that it acts as a positive deterrent against future crime. There are also many
Prior to the case of Gideon v. Wainwright, defendant Clarence Earl Gideon was charged with breaking and entering in the state of Florida. This crime is a felony according to Florida state law. Unable to pay for defense counsel, Gideon requested that the court grant him one for free. The court denied Gideon his request of being granted defense counsel. The court stated, “Under the laws of the State of Florida, the only time the Court can appoint Counsel to represent a Defendant is when that person charged with a capital offense.” As a result of this denial of defense counsel, Gideon was forced to defend himself and did not succeed in doing an adequate job.
Gideon v. Wainwright was a 1963 landmark case in the United States Supreme Court. The court case involved the right to counsel under the Fifth and Sixth Amendment that eventually lead to a fundamental right. The Supreme Court eventually ruled that states are required under the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to provide an attorney to defendants in criminal cases who are unable to afford their own attorneys. On June 3,1963 in Panama City, Florida a man known by Clarence Earl Gideon was arrested and charged with breaking and entering a poolroom in Florida with the intent to commit a misdemeanor offense therefore, he was charged with a felony. Clarence Earl Gideon was a poor man from Florida who ran away from home at a early age and was also under educated and had dyslexic throughout his life.
Application: In the case of Betts v. Brady, Betts was brought to trial on robbery charges and, like Gideon, could not afford an attorney and was refused to be provided with one. He, too, was forced to represent himself and found guilty. While serving his sentence, the Betts filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, with the circuit court, claiming he had been deprived the right to assistance of counsel, guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. His initial petition was rejected, and then he filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus with the Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals of Maryland, again asserting he was denied his Fourteenth Amendment constitutional right to be represented by
The death penalty is one of the most controversial topics in America today due to its turbulent nature. Capital punishment is highly debated and it encompasses a plethora of ethical, religious, political, and legal issues. Texas is one of the thirty-eight states in the nation that practices this form of punishment. (Naidoff, Caitlin) Although Texas is the state with the greatest number of death row sentences and executions, it has one of the highest crime rates in the entire nation. Therefore, the death penalty is ineffective because it does not diminish the incidence of crimes, take the life of innocent people, is racially unequal, costly, and alternative measure can be implemented
The late, Louis Pojman, was a great American philosopher, who was known for his many writings such as A Defense of the Death Penalty. The death penalty has always been a very touchy subject for most people. People have their views of what they consider right or wrong. Philosopher Pojman was pro-death penalty, so naturally he had some who agreed with him and some that did not. As I read the “Best Bet” argument my opinion of murderers is that they deserve to be killed for their horrid actions. Pojman uses emotion to prove his argument very well.
The Death Penalty, loss of life due to previous crimes and actions, is believed by some to be extremely costly, inhumane, and cruel unlike some others whom believe it is just, right, and provides closure. The Death Penalty is not a quick and easy process. Most who get sentenced to deaths row wait years for their ultimate punishment of death. Some believe that it is not right to punish and kill a human for actions they have done because, they believe that the inmate should have another chance. Then others believe that it is right to punish someone for their actions especially if their actions involve killing another or multiple humans.
The Eumenides confronts two contradictory perspectives: the Furies of the ancient order against Apollo of the young generation of Gods. Aeschylus introduces spiritual conflict within the human and universal realms. There is a lack of understanding of justice within the individual, producing an interrelational struggle amongst citizens, and resulting to the incomplete human identity in correspondence to their community. The justice system conquers upon an arbitrary verdict, providing little insight of the positions of good or evil. Aeschylus, through Athena, offers a compromise between two opposing radical ideas, balancing the neutrality of logic and sentiment within the individual, to strengthen unity of a society, and to stimulate the transcendance of humanity.