Kennedy v. Louisiana

Kennedy v. Louisiana, 554 U.S. 407 (2008), is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States which held that the Eighth Amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause prohibits the imposition of the death penalty for a crime in which the victim did not die and the victim's death was not intended.

Contents

• 1 Background

• 2 Case history

• 3 Argument

• 4 Questions of law presented

• 5 Opinion of the Supreme Court

  • 5.1 Majority

  • 5.2 Dissent

• 6 Reactions

• 7 Subsequent developments

  • 7.1 Reversed death sentence

  • 7.2 Petition for rehearing

• 8 See also

• 9 References

• 10 External links

Background

(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kennedy_v._Louisiana&action=edit&section=1 "Edit section: Background")

Rape was a capital crime in most jurisdictions during the 19th and early-20th century. In 1972 the Court decided in _Furman v. Georgia _ that arbitrary and capricious sentencing outcomes in death penalty cases were unconstitutional. States revised their statutes to comply with Furman. The new statutes and constitutionality of the death penalty were upheld in _Gregg v. Georgia _ (1976).

The categorical exclusion of some classes of defendants from death penalty eligibility in _Atkins v. Virginia _, _Enmund v. Florida _ and _Roper v. Simmons _ was because of the diminished culpability of juveniles and intellectually disabled defendants. Until Kennedy v. Louisiana, the only case to categorically exclude a crime was _Coker v. Georgia _ (1977), when the Supreme Court held that the death penalty was unconstitutional for the crime of raping an adult. After Coker some states introduced new legislation allowing the death penalty for rape of very young children under 12, based on a theory that Coker was limited to the rape of adult women (the victim in that case was a 16 year old married woman with a newborn baby).

Kennedy held that the death penalty is a disproportionate punishment not only for the rape of an adult woman, but also for the rape of a child, and for any ordinary non-homicide crime where a life was not taken. The Court noted that the "evolving standards of decency...requires that use of the death penalty be restrained".

Case history

(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kennedy_v._Louisiana&action=edit&section=2 "Edit section: Case history")

Patrick O'Neal Kennedy (born December 13, 1964), a man from Harvey, Louisiana in Greater New Orleans , was sentenced to death after being convicted of raping and sodomizing his eight-year-old stepdaughter. The rape, taking place in March 1998, was uncommonly brutal: it tore the victim's perineum "from her vaginal opening to her anal opening. [It] tore her vagina on the interior such that it separated partially from her cervix and allowed her rectum to protrude into her vagina. Invasive emergency surgery was required to repair these injuries." The victim told the police that Kennedy had raped her on at least four other occasions and coached her to pin the crime on two teenagers. Kennedy was also accused of molesting four foster children.

Kennedy maintained that the battery was committed by two neighborhood boys, and refused to plead guilty when a deal was offered to spare him from a death sentence. Nevertheless, he was convicted in 2003 and sentenced under a 1995 Louisiana law that allowed the death penalty for the rape of a child under the age of 12.

On appeal, Kennedy challenged the constitutionality of executing a person solely for child rape. The Louisiana Supreme Court rejected the challenge on the grounds that the death penalty was not too harsh for such a heinous offense. The Louisiana court distinguished the U.S. Supreme Court 's plurality decision in _Coker v. Georgia _ (1977), concluding that _Coker'_s rejection of death as punishment for rape of an adult woman did not apply when the victim was a child.

Kennedy was one of two men in the country under sentence of death for a crime other than murder; the other, Richard L. Davis, had been sentenced under the same Louisiana law. Kennedy sought direct review of the Louisiana Supreme Court's decision in the Supreme Court of the United States, which agreed to hear the case in January 2008.

Argument

(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kennedy_v._Louisiana&action=edit&section=3 "Edit section: Argument")

Jeffrey L. Fisher , a Stanford Law School professor appealing on behalf of Kennedy, argued there was "overwhelming national consensus" against capital punishment for rape, including child rape. He argued that between 1930 and 1964, the last year such an execution had occurred, most of the people executed for rape in the United States were black. Furthermore, all fourteen people executed for rape in Louisiana during that same time period were black.

The state of Louisiana said that more States were authorizing the death sentence for child rape since Coker. In Atkins the Supreme Court had written that "it is not so much the number of these States that is significant, but the consistency of the direction of change" for a finding of national consensus against the execution of the intellectually disabled. The state of Louisiana argued that the same logic should apply to expand death penalty availability if the number of states authorizing the death penalty for that crime has been increasing over time.

Questions of law presented

(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kennedy_v._Louisiana&action=edit&section=4 "Edit section: Questions of law presented")

1. Does the Eighth Amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause permit a state to use the death penalty to punish the crime of raping a child?
2. If so, does Louisiana's capital rape statute violate the Eighth Amendment insofar as it fails genuinely to narrow the class of such offenders eligible for the death penalty?

Opinion of the Supreme Court

(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kennedy_v._Louisiana&action=edit&section=5 "Edit section: Opinion of the Supreme Court")

Majority

(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kennedy_v._Louisiana&action=edit&section=6 "Edit section: Majority")

The "evolving standards of decency" test is a two-step test based on the principle that disproportionate punishment is unconstitutional according to the cruel and unusual punishment clause. The Court says that evolving standards of decency "must embrace and express respect for the dignity of the person".

The court first considers "objective" evidence to determine if there is a "national consensus" against the punishment. This objective evidence includes, inter alia, a review of how many states allow the punishment:

After reviewing the authorities informed by contemporary norms, including the history of the death penalty for this and other nonhomicide crimes, current state statutes and new enactments, and the number of executions since 1964, we conclude there is a national consensus against capital punishment for the crime of child rape.

Responding to Louisiana's objection that more states would have approved capital punishment for child rape if Coker had not been ambiguous, the Court concluded that _Coker'_s holding was correctly understood by state legislatures as limited to adult women:

The small number of States that have enacted this penalty, then, is relevant to determining whether th

…