Johnson v. Illinois

Background

A person sentenced to death under Illinois law sought review by the Supreme Court. The Court denied review (certiorari denied). The text of Illinois’ Death Penalty Act quoted in the opinions says that once an aggravating factor is found, the sentencer considers statutory and mitigating factors and that “If the Court determines that there are no mitigating factors sufficient to preclude the imposition of the death sentence, the Court shall sentence the defendant to death.”

Reasoning

The central practical question in the papers was whether Illinois’ capital-sentencing procedure improperly places the burden on the defendant to show that death is not appropriate, and whether that scheme is constitutionally invalid. The Court’s action was simply to deny review; the opinion text does not supply the Court’s reasons for that denial. Because the Court declined to take the case, there is no Supreme Court ruling on the constitutional challenges in this opinion.

Real world impact

The immediate practical effect is that the state-level death sentence described in these filings remains unreviewed by the Supreme Court for now. The larger legal questions about the Illinois sentencing rule and the proper allocation of burdens in capital cases remain unresolved by this denial, and any change in the defendant’s sentence or in the law would require further proceedings or a different case reaching the Court.

Dissents or concurrances

Two Justices wrote dissents. Justice Brennan said he views the death penalty as always cruel and unusual and would grant review and vacate the death sentence. Justice Marshall would grant review to decide whether the Illinois scheme is unconstitutional and said the statute’s language appears to place the burden on the defendant, contrary to prior decisions he cited (Gacy v. Illinois and Jones v. Illinois).