Gregg V. Georgia Case Analysis

Gregg v. Georgia 428 US 153 (1976)
History: The case of Gregg v. Georgia originated in the state of Georgia. The case originally took place in the Georgia Supreme court where the petitioner originally pleaded guilty to the charges brought against them. From there the petitioner challenged the decision and said the death penalty was cruel and unusual punishment under the eighth and fourteenth amendments. From this stage the case was then heard by the United States Supreme Courts. The United States Supreme Court, however rejected Gregg’s claim and confirmed the decision made by the Georgia Supreme Court that Gregg would be sentenced to death. Facts: The petitioner who brought up this particular case was by a man named Troy Gregg. The petitioner …show more content…
One of the arguments that the court rejected was made by Justice Brennan. He claimed that an executed person loses their right to have rights. The point he was trying to make was that once the offender was executed, they lose any chance of exoneration. Another argument that the court heard was from the defendant himself. He claimed that the death penalty should be considered unconstitutional under the means that mistakes are made and there are people that are wrongfully executed. The court heard the defendant’s argument, however ultimately rejected it as well. The court’s rationale behind rejecting both Justice Brennan and the defendant’s arguments was based on the fact that they believed that the death penalty was perfectly acceptable according to Georgia’s system of executing prisoners. In addition to the arguments to the court there was also a dissenting opinion in the majority decision of Gregg v. Georgia. The judge that was not in favor of the majority decision was Judge Thurgood Marshall. He claimed that the death penalty was unconstitutional for two main reasons. The first was that it was excessive in its nature and the second was the fact that if the American people were to be fully informed on the specifics of the death penalty and knew more about it then they too would consider it morally unacceptable. Judge Marshall believes the death penalty to be unconstitutional based on the …show more content…
It states “nor shall cruel and unusual punishment be inflicted.” He believed that since the death penalty was not a necessary component in reducing or deterring crime and being effective in retribution towards the offender than it should be deemed unconstitutional. He suggested that the death penalty be replaced with life in prison instead. From what I have learned while conducting all of this research about Gregg v. Georgia I would say that I agree with the dissenting opinion rather than the majority decision. I came to the conclusion that the death penalty should be deemed unconstitutional after reading through everything Judge Thurgood Marshall. Prior to reading his thoughts I would say that I probably sat on the fence in the middle, I wasn’t really for it nor was I against it. However, after really reading what Judge Marshall said about the topic, I do believe it is a violation of a person’s eighth amendment rights to cruel and unusual punishment. I feel that my decision goes further than the violation of the amendment. I also did a little extra research and found that it is more expensive to execute someone rather than have them serve a sentence of life without the