Case brief-Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972), which shaped the course of justice was a criminal case in which the United States Supreme Court made a ruling that imposition of the death penalty violates the 8th and 14th Amendments and constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. It was a per curium decision

Follow all the directions in How to write a case brief PDF, very precisely, the professor is strict. Be thorough and use the same format. Use the sources i provide: one pdf below and this one here: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/408/238/

Use this format for citations: https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/mla_style/mla_formatting_and_style_guide/mla_formatting_and_style_guide.html

Please choose one of the cases listed below to brief for this assignment. They all deal with the Eighth Amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment, specifically, the use of the death penalty. (I choose Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972))

Case brief-Furman v. Georgia

This assignment is due by 11:59 pm on Friday.

Please be mindful of citations and references, as your assignment will be screened by the Turnitin plagiarism detection software. I will review the full Turnitin reports for any assignment that receives a Similarity Score higher than 30%. If plagiarism is apparent, the student will receive a score of 0 for the assignment.

8th amendment Case brief- Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972)

Abolishing the death penalty is a sign of the country’s advancement. The present issue is whether the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment based on the “evolving standards of decency.”  Once utilized punishments may no longer be constitutional. Most states have capital punishment but have narrowed their use. The death penalty is likely unconscionable to most Americans. The penalty unfair and usually administered on the basis of social class, gender and minority membership. This country safeguards its fundamental principles of justice even in times of trouble.

Capital punishment serves the legitimate state goals of incapacitation and deterrence and is constitutional. The Framers of the Constitution intended to prohibit torture. No precedent of this Court has disputed the constitutionality of the penalty.  After taking into consideration the number of jurisdictions permitting the penalty, the legislatures’ judgments, and public polls, it is reasonable to conclude the death penalty is accepted by people.