Facts of the Case At the age of 17, Christopher Simmons murdered Shirley Crook in the state of Missouri in 1933. Simmons was sentenced to death after it was found that he had concocted a plan to break into the home of Crook, tie her up, and toss her off of a bridge with two other friends, Charles Benjamin and John Tessmer. In the middle of the night at about 2 a.m., Benjamin and Simmons broke into the victims home through an open window and carried out the crime as planned without Tessmer, who dropped out of the plan. Simmons had no criminal history but because of the overwhelming evidence, a testimony from his younger friend Tessmer, Simmons confession to the murder, and videotaped reenactment at the crime the court considered the murder
…show more content…
The defense found these factors to be very important in making the decision for the punishment to the crime. The prosecution found his age and the details of the crime to be contrary to the defense's argument. The mother, father, siblings, neighbor, and friend testified for Simmons in trial saying the respondent had close relationships and demonstrated a capacity for love as he took care of his two younger siblings and grandmother. After the three mitigating factors were considered, the jury recommended the death sentence and the judge enacted it. With new counsel, Simmons appealed to the Missouri Supreme Court and filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus to the federal courts, and were all denied as they felt there was no constitutional violation. Simmons argued that he had not received ineffective assistance at trial as he felt that his age, impulsiveness, and susceptibility to being manipulated or influenced was not considered. His counsel also brought to the attention during closing arguments, that Simmons had a troubled background as he was and had performed poorly in school and was using drugs and alcohol with other kids his age while he was away from home for long periods at a time with the support from …show more content…
The court looked back on the history of the execution of juveniles and found that the rates of capital punishment to juveniles had been reducing in frequency. To support the holding, the Courts also looked to other countries and how they handled the execution of juveniles guilty of murder. And found that many of the countries had discontinued the practice of the death penalty for minors. On a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Missouri, Justice Stevens and Justice Ginsburg concurred that the evolving standards of decency do change our understandings of the Constitution and if the interpretation of the Amendment held when it was originally drafted it would allow for the execution of 7-year-old children today. Justice Scalia, Chief Justice and Justice Thomas dissented as they felt that the meaning of the Eighth Amendment should be “determined by the subjective views of the members of the court and like-minded foreigner”. Justice Scalia also dissented, as he did not agree with the Courts belief that death is a disproportionate severe punishment for any 17-year-old offender as he felt that some 17-year-old murderers are mature enough to deserve the death penalty in the appropriate case. Justice Scalia also felt that the Court had no evidence to support the notion that capital sentencing
The defense found these factors to be very important in making the decision for the punishment to the crime. The prosecution found his age and the details of the crime to be contrary to the defense's argument. The mother, father, siblings, neighbor, and friend testified for Simmons in trial saying the respondent had close relationships and demonstrated a capacity for love as he took care of his two younger siblings and grandmother. After the three mitigating factors were considered, the jury recommended the death sentence and the judge enacted it. With new counsel, Simmons appealed to the Missouri Supreme Court and filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus to the federal courts, and were all denied as they felt there was no constitutional violation. Simmons argued that he had not received ineffective assistance at trial as he felt that his age, impulsiveness, and susceptibility to being manipulated or influenced was not considered. His counsel also brought to the attention during closing arguments, that Simmons had a troubled background as he was and had performed poorly in school and was using drugs and alcohol with other kids his age while he was away from home for long periods at a time with the support from …show more content…
The court looked back on the history of the execution of juveniles and found that the rates of capital punishment to juveniles had been reducing in frequency. To support the holding, the Courts also looked to other countries and how they handled the execution of juveniles guilty of murder. And found that many of the countries had discontinued the practice of the death penalty for minors. On a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Missouri, Justice Stevens and Justice Ginsburg concurred that the evolving standards of decency do change our understandings of the Constitution and if the interpretation of the Amendment held when it was originally drafted it would allow for the execution of 7-year-old children today. Justice Scalia, Chief Justice and Justice Thomas dissented as they felt that the meaning of the Eighth Amendment should be “determined by the subjective views of the members of the court and like-minded foreigner”. Justice Scalia also dissented, as he did not agree with the Courts belief that death is a disproportionate severe punishment for any 17-year-old offender as he felt that some 17-year-old murderers are mature enough to deserve the death penalty in the appropriate case. Justice Scalia also felt that the Court had no evidence to support the notion that capital sentencing