Home › Case briefs › Criminal Procedure

Gregg v. Georgia

Supreme Court of the United States · 1976 · Criminal Procedure

Criminal ProcedureConstitutional LawEighth Amendmentdeath penaltyguided discretionbifurcated trialEighth AmendmentFourteenth Amendment

Facts

Gregg was charged with armed robbery and murder after he and a companion were arrested while driving the victims' car, and a pistol found in Gregg's pocket was later shown to be the murder weapon. At trial, the State presented evidence, including Gregg's signed statement admitting that he shot and robbed the victims, though Gregg testified that he acted in self-defense. Georgia used a bifurcated capital procedure with a guilt phase followed by a sentencing phase before the same jury. At sentencing, the jury was told it could impose life or death, but could not impose death unless it found beyond a reasonable doubt at least one statutory aggravating circumstance; it found that the murders were committed during armed robberies and for the purpose of receiving money and the automobile, and imposed death.

Issue

Whether the imposition of the death penalty for murder under Georgia's post-Furman capital sentencing scheme violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. More specifically, whether death is always unconstitutional for murder and whether Georgia's procedures sufficiently channel sentencing discretion to avoid arbitrary and capricious imposition.

Rule

The death penalty does not invariably violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments when imposed for murder. But because death is different in kind from other punishments, a capital sentencing scheme must direct and limit the sentencer's discretion so as to minimize the risk of arbitrary and capricious sentencing; a system using a bifurcated proceeding, requiring at least one statutory aggravating circumstance, permitting consideration of relevant aggravating and mitigating evidence, and providing meaningful appellate review can satisfy that requirement.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

Oregon enacts a statute authorizing the death penalty for intentional murder. After Noah Bennett is convicted in Portland of deliberately killing a store clerk during a planned robbery, he argues on direct appeal that death is always unconstitutional for murder, no matter what procedures the state uses.

How should the court rule on Noah's categorical Eighth Amendment challenge?

Explanation. The majority held that capital punishment for murder is not per se cruel and unusual punishment. The Court relied on history, constitutional text, legislative acceptance, and the legitimate penological purposes of retribution and deterrence. A defendant therefore cannot prevail merely by arguing that death is always unconstitutional for murder in every circumstance.