Share
Explore BrainMass

general scruples against capital punishment

In Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 (1968), the U.S. Supreme Court held that jurors cannot be removed merely because of general scruples against capital punishment, adding that a juror may be excluded "for cause" if it is "unmistakably clear" that he or she would automatically vote against the death penalty if sought by the prosecutor or if the juror could not be impartial in the determination of the defendant's guilt. This holding was affirmed in Lockhart v. McCree, 476 U.S. 162 (1986). Discuss the effects of these rulings. How are the two cases similar? How are they different? Do you agree with the decision of the Court? Why or why not?

Solution Preview

http://american-civil-liberties.com/cases/4067-lockhart-v-mccree-476-us-162-1986.html

In Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 (1968), the U.S. Supreme Court held that jurors cannot be removed merely because of general scruples against capital punishment, adding that a juror may be excluded "for cause" if it is "unmistakably clear" that he or she would automatically vote against the death penalty if sought by the prosecutor or if the juror could not be impartial in the determination of the defendant's guilt. This holding was affirmed in Lockhart v. McCree, 476 U.S. 162 (1986). In 2-3 pages, discuss the effects of these rulings. How are the two cases similar? How are they different? Do you agree with the decision of the Court? Why or why not?
Lockhart v. McCree did not AFFIRM the ruling iin Witherspoon v. Illinois because the Court distinctly distinguished between Lockhart and Witherspoon in its ruling as Witherspoon ...

Solution Summary

The general scruples against capital punishments are provided.

$2.19