California v. Anderson
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| California v. Anderson | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Supreme Court of California |
||||||||||||||
| Argued February 18, 1972 |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
| Holding | ||||||||||||||
| The use of capital punishment in the state of California was deemed unconstitutional because it was considered cruel and unusual. | ||||||||||||||
| Court membership | ||||||||||||||
| Chief Justice Donald R. Wright Associate Justices Mathew O. Tobriner, Stanley Mosk, Louis H. Burke, Raymond L. Sullivan, Marshall F. McComb |
||||||||||||||
| Case opinions | ||||||||||||||
| Majority by: Wright Joined by: Peters, Tobriner, Mosk, Burke, Sullivan Dissent by: McComb |
||||||||||||||
| Laws applied | ||||||||||||||
| Cal. Penal Code §§ 4500, 1239b; California Constitution Article I section 6 | ||||||||||||||
The People of the State of California v. Robert Page Anderson, 64 Cal.2d 633, 414 P.2d 366 (Cal. 1972), was a landmark case in the state of California that outlawed the use of capital punishment.
Contents |
[edit] Case
The case was an automatic appeal to the court under California Penal Code § 1239b, which provides that in the case of a death sentence, the case is automatically appealed to the State Supreme Court.
Robert Page Anderson was convicted of first degree murder, attempted murder of three men, and first degree robbery. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the lower court in People v. Anderson 64 Cal.2d 633 [51 Cal.Rptr. 238, 414 P.2d 366] (1966), but reversed its decision with respect to the sentence of the death penalty In re Anderson , 69 Cal.2d 613 (1968) following the landmark case, Witherspoon v. Illinois (1968), which decided that it is illegal to remove as challenges for cause, a juror who simply disagrees with the death penalty, unless the juror adamantly would not follow the law under any circumstances. The case was retried on the issue of the defendant's penalty, and the jury again returned a verdict of death.
[edit] Decision
What is odd in the decision is that in the original case (1966) the court did not even raise the issue as to whether the death penalty was unconstitutional. In the second hearing, which also was in 1968 the court did raise the issue but decided that the death penalty was neither cruel nor unusual, but in view of Witherspoon the defendant's death sentence was unconstitutionally decided. In this third hearing, the court changed its mind and decided the death penalty was cruel and unusual.
The court ruled that the use of capital punishment was considered impermissibly cruel and unusual as it degraded and dehumanized the parties involved. Furthermore the court also cited the view of capital punishment in American society as one of the most important reasons for its acceptability, contending that a growing population and decreasing amount of executions was persuasive evidence that such a punishment was no longer condoned by the general public.
The case also turned on a difference in wording between the U.S. Constititution's 8th Amendment argument against cruel and unusual punishment and Article 1, Section 6 of the California Constitution (the provision has since moved to Article 1, Section 17), which read
| “ | All persons shall be bailable by sufficient sureties, unless for capital offenses when the proof is evident or the presumption great. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed; nor shall cruel or unusual punishments be inflicted. Witnesses shall not be unreasonably detained, nor confined in any room where criminals are actually imprisoned. | ” |
Since the State Constitution prohibits a punishment which is either of the two conditions (as opposed to prohibiting ones that violate both conditions), the court found the penalty unconstitutional on state constitutional grounds since if it violated either provision it was unconstitutional at the state level. The court even went so far as to decline to even consider if the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution since it had already found it to be in violation of the state constitution.
The state contended that while the use of capital punishment served no rehabilitating purposes, it was a legitimate punishment for retribution in serious offenses, in that it served to isolate the offender, and was a useful deterrent to crime. The court rejected the state's defense citing that there were far less onerous means of isolating the offender, and the lack of proof that capital punishment is an effective deterrent.
[edit] Dissent
Justice Marshall F. McComb wrote a brief dissent on the basis that the landmark case, Furman v. Georgia was currently on the docket of the Supreme Court of the United States and that the court should await its decision before ruling. (As it turned out, the court in Furman would also find the Death Penalty unconstitutional.)
[edit] Effects
The case caused all persons sentenced to death in the state of California to be commuted to life in prison. The United States Supreme Court in Aikens v. California, 406 U.S. 813 (1972) denied an appeal of a death sentence because the decision in Anderson
| “ | declared capital punishment in California unconstitutional under Art. 1, 6, of the state constitution... The California Supreme Court declared in the Anderson case that its decision was fully retroactive and stated that any prisoner currently under sentence of death could petition a superior court to modify its judgment. [Aikens] thus no longer faces a realistic threat of execution... | ” |
Later in 1972 the people of the state passed a constitutional amendment overturning the court ruling and reinstating the death penalty. Due to the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Furman later the same year declaring all Capital Punishment in the U.S. to be unconstitutional until overturned four years later in Gregg v. Georgia 428 U.S. 153 (1976), plus extensive appellate and habeas corpus litigation in capital cases, no death sentences were carried out until 1992 when Robert Alton Harris was executed in the gas chamber.
[edit] See also
[edit] External links
- Opinion of the Court (Registration Required)
- Ninth Circuit Capital Punishment Handbook
 |
This Case Law article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
