Supreme Court of the United States · 1983 · Criminal Law
463 U.S. 277 (1983)
Updated
Criminal LawproportionalityEighth Amendmentcruel and unusual punishmentrecidivist statutelife without parolehabitual offendernonviolent felony
Facts
Helm had six prior felony convictions, all described in the record as nonviolent and not crimes against persons, and alcohol was a contributing factor in each case. In 1979 he pleaded guilty to uttering a "no account" check for $100, an offense ordinarily punishable by up to five years' imprisonment and a fine. Because of South Dakota's recidivist statute, the trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment as a Class 1 felon. Under South Dakota law, a person sentenced to life imprisonment was not eligible for parole, leaving only the possibility of gubernatorial commutation.
Issue
Does the Eighth Amendment prohibit a sentence of life imprisonment without possibility of parole imposed for a seventh nonviolent felony under a recidivist statute?
Rule
The Eighth Amendment prohibits not only barbaric punishments but also criminal sentences that are disproportionate to the crime. In assessing proportionality, courts should be guided by objective criteria, including: (i) the gravity of the offense and the harshness of the penalty; (ii) the sentences imposed on other criminals in the same jurisdiction; and (iii) the sentences imposed for commission of the same crime in other jurisdictions.
🔒
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
One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.
In Ohio, Damon Rios receives a 30-year prison sentence for a felony property offense after the trial judge finds that Damon has multiple prior felonies. On appeal, the State argues that the Eighth Amendment's proportionality principle applies only to death sentences and barbaric punishments, not to a term of imprisonment.
How should the appellate court respond?
Explanation. The majority held as a matter of principle that the Eighth Amendment prohibits not only barbaric punishments but also criminal sentences that are disproportionate to the crime, and that this principle applies to felony prison sentences. The Court stressed that successful noncapital proportionality challenges will be exceedingly rare, but not unavailable. Thus a prison term is not categorically insulated from Eighth Amendment review.