Payne v. Tennessee

Supreme Court of the United States · 1991 · Criminal Law

Criminal LawCapital SentencingEighth AmendmentVictim Impact Evidencevictim impact evidencecapital sentencingEighth Amendmentdeath penalty

Facts

During the penalty phase of Payne's capital trial, the State called the surviving child's grandmother, who testified briefly that the child cried for his mother and sister and missed them. In closing, the prosecutor referred to the continuing effects of the murders on the surviving child and to the victims as human beings whose lives had been taken. Payne, by contrast, introduced mitigating evidence about his own character, background, and mental limitations. Payne argued that the grandmother's testimony and the prosecutor's comments were barred by Booth and Gathers.

Issue

Whether the Eighth Amendment bars a capital sentencing jury from hearing victim impact evidence and prosecutorial argument concerning the victim's personal characteristics and the emotional impact of the murder on the victim's family. Also, whether Booth v. Maryland and South Carolina v. Gathers should be overruled.

Rule

If a State chooses to permit the admission of victim impact evidence and prosecutorial argument on that subject, the Eighth Amendment erects no per se bar. A State may conclude that evidence about the victim and about the impact of the murder on the victim's family is relevant to the jury's sentencing decision, though unduly prejudicial evidence that renders the trial fundamentally unfair remains subject to relief under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

🔒

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.

In a capital murder sentencing proceeding in Phoenix, the prosecution calls the victim's sister, Elena Ruiz. She testifies that since the killing, the victim's father has stopped attending family gatherings and the victim's young son still leaves voice messages on his mother's old phone. The defense objects that the Eighth Amendment categorically bars any such testimony.

How should the court rule?

Explanation. The majority held that if a State chooses to permit it, the Eighth Amendment erects no per se bar to evidence about the victim and the impact of the murder on the victim's family at the penalty phase of a capital trial. The State may conclude such evidence is relevant to the jury's sentencing decision as part of the specific harm caused by the crime. (Derived from Payne v. Tennessee (1991).)