Sutton v. Tennessee

Background

Many cases from state and federal courts involved people sentenced to death. The petitions asking the Supreme Court to review those sentences were considered and, according to the opinion text, the Court denied review (certiorari denied) for the listed cases. The separate short opinion in the record is a dissent by two Justices who explained their opposing view.

Reasoning

The published text shows the Court declined to hear these appeals, and no majority opinion explaining that denial appears in the provided excerpt. Because the Court refused review, the rulings and death sentences from the lower courts remain in effect as written. The dissenting Justices, adhering to their long-held view, stated they would have granted review and would have vacated the death sentences on the ground that the death penalty is always cruel and unusual punishment.

Real world impact

As a result of the Court’s refusal to hear these cases, the specific death sentences named in the list remain in place for now under the governing lower-court judgments. This outcome is not a Supreme Court ruling on the constitutionality of the death penalty itself; it is a decision not to take up these particular appeals. The situation could change if the Court later agrees to review similar cases or if lower courts alter their rulings.

Dissents or concurrances

Justices Brennan and Marshall dissented, stating they would grant review and vacate the sentences because they view the death penalty as always prohibited under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, citing their prior positions and Gregg v. Georgia.