Roper vs. Simmons underage death penalty case.?

I'm doing a report about the case of Roper vs. Christopher Simmons and I'm siding with Roper. I have to write an essay about the 3 main points why Simmons deserves the death penalty. I have the three points, but I was wondering if you could find arguements by the supreme couret justices on why Simmons should get the death penalty. That was I can beef up my paper with textual support.

Update:

U just cop and pasted Wikipedia

3 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005) was a decision in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that it is unconstitutional to impose capital punishment for crimes committed while under the age of 18. The 5-4 decision overruled the Court's prior ruling upholding such sentences on offenders above or at the age of 16, in Stanford v. Kentucky, 492 U.S. 361 (1989).

    [Collapse] Wikipedia: Making Life Easier.

    $2,484,695 Our Goal: $6 million Donate Now »

    [Expand] Support Wikipedia: a non-profit project

    Donate Now »

    Roper v. Simmons

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Jump to: navigation, search

    Roper v. Simmons

    Supreme Court of the United States

    Argued October 13, 2004

    Decided March 1, 2005

    Full case name: Donald P. Roper, Superintendent, Potosi Correctional Center, Petitioner v. Christopher Simmons

    Docket no.: 03-633

    Citations: 543 U.S. 551 (see more...); 125 S. Ct. 1183; 161 L. Ed. 2d 1; 2005 U.S. LEXIS 2200; 73 U.S.L.W. 4153; 18 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 131

    Prior history: Defendant convicted, motion for postconviction relief denied, Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Missouri; affirmed, 944 S. W. 2d 165 (Mo. 1997) (en banc), certiorari denied, 522 U. S. 953 (1997). Denial of petition for a writ of habeas corpus affirmed, 235 F. 3d 1124 (CA8), certiorari denied, 534 U. S. 924 (2001). Petition for a writ of habeas corpus granted, 112 S. W. 3d 397 (Mo. 2003) (en banc), certiorari granted, 540 U. S. 1160 (2004)

    Argument: Oral argument

    Holding

    The Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments forbid imposition of the death penalty on offenders who were under the age of 18 when their crimes were committed. Supreme Court of Missouri affirmed.

    Court membership

    Chief Justice: William Rehnquist

    Associate Justices: John Paul Stevens, Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer

    Case opinions

    Majority by: Kennedy

    Joined by: Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer

    Concurrence by: Stevens

    Joined by: Ginsburg

    Dissent by: O'Connor

    Dissent by: Scalia

    Joined by: Rehnquist, Thomas

    Laws applied

    U.S. Const. amends. VIII, XIV

    Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005) was a decision in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that it is unconstitutional to impose capital punishment for crimes committed while under the age of 18. The 5-4 decision overruled the Court's prior ruling upholding such sentences on offenders above or at the age of 16, in Stanford v. Kentucky, 492 U.S. 361 (1989).

    Contents [hide]

    1 The case

    2 The ruling

    3 The dissents

    4 Implications

    4.1 Constitutional Jurisprudence

    4.2 Beltway Sniper Case

    4.3 Further Developments

    5 See also

    6 References

    7 External links

    [edit] The case

    This case, which originated in Missouri, involved Christopher Simmons, who in 1993 at the age of 17 concocted a plan to murder Shirley Crook, bringing two younger friends, Charles Benjamin and John Tessmer, into the plot. The plan was to commit burglary and murder by breaking and entering, tying up a victim, and tossing the victim off a bridge. The three met in the middle of the night; however, Tessmer then dropped out of the plot. Simmons and Benjamin broke into Mrs. Crook's home, bound her hands and covered her eyes. They drove her to a state park and threw her off a bridge.

    Once the case went to trial, the evidence was overwhelming. Simmons had confessed to the murder, performed a videotaped reenactment at the crime scene, and there was testimony from Tessmer against him that showed premeditation (he discussed the plot in advance and later bragged about the crime). The jury returned a guilty verdict. Even considering mitigating factors (no criminal history, sympathy from Simmons' family, and most significantly for the later appeal, his age), the jury nonetheless recommended a death sentence, which the trial court imposed. Simmons first moved for the trial court to set aside the conviction and sentence, citing, in part, ineffective assistance of counsel. His age, and thus impulsiveness, along with a troubled background were brought up as issues that Simmons claimed should have been raised at the sentencing phase. The trial court rejected the motion, and Simmons appealed.

    The case worked its way up the court system, with the courts continuing to uphold the death sentence. However, in light of a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, in Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002), that overturned the death penalty for the mentally retarded, Simmons filed a new petition for state post conviction relief, and the Supreme Court of Missouri concluded that "a national consensus has developed against the execution of juvenile offenders" and sentenced Simmons to life imprisonment without parole.

    The State of Missouri appealed the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case. (Donald P. Roper, the Superintendent of the correctional facility where Simmons was held, was a part

  • 4 years ago

    Roper Vs Simmons

  • 4 years ago

    Why will have to there NOT be? Just like an grownup they made a alternative to take yet another lifestyles, frequently violently. If you're 17 or seventy seven you're responsible of homicide correct? Just when you consider that a child is 14 doesn't suggest he cannot kill someone. He is aware of correct from flawed, that is the one authorized culpability. did you undertand that your movements wre flawed? Almost all understand they have been flawed else they would not run, conceal and lie. How's that?

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.