Journal Article

Truth in Sentencing: The Prospective and Retroactive Application of Simmons v South Carolina

Cooper, Benjamin P.

1996

Overview

In Simmons v. South Carolina (1994), the Supreme Court held that when the prosecutor rests his case for the death penalty on the defendant's future dangerousness, and where the defendant is ineligible for parole, due process requires that the jury be informed that the defendant is ineligible for parole, even though state law otherwise prevents the jury from considering parole eligibility. A prosecutor must not be able to mislead jurors into believing that the defendant, who will never be eligible for parole, will one day pose a danger to society if not sentenced to death. While the Supreme Court faced a rather easy decision in Simmons, lower courts have confronted a much more difficult task in addressing the dozens of Simmons claims that have subsequently come before them. These claims come in 2 varieties: 1. Defendants whose convictions were not final at the time of the Simmons decision seek the benefit of the Simmons ruling on direct appeal. 2. Defendants whose convictions were final at the time of Simmons seek to use it to make a collateral attack on their death sentences.

• Publisher: University of Chicago Law School,University of Chicago Press,University of Chicago, acting on behalf of the University of Chicago Law Review
• Subject: Attorneys / Capital punishment / Comments / Convictions / Courts of appeals / Criminal justice / Criminal sentences / Criminal sentencing / Death / Defendants / Eighth Amendment / Federal court decisions / Juries / Law / Lower courts / Parole / Parole & probation / Prosecuting attorneys / Sentencing / Supreme Court decisions / United States