Cruel and Unusual Punishment What Does That Mean??

Cruel and Cruel and Unusual Unusual

PunishmentPunishment

What Does That Mean??What Does That Mean??

Was the malfunctioning Was the malfunctioning electric chair cruel and electric chair cruel and

unusual?unusual?

No!No!

The Constitution protects against a The Constitution protects against a cruel cruel methodmethod of execution. Just of execution. Just

because an accident happened the because an accident happened the first time does not make the method first time does not make the method cruel. Nobody intended to cause the cruel. Nobody intended to cause the prisoner to suffer unnecessary pain.prisoner to suffer unnecessary pain.

Louisiana ex. rel. Francis v. ResweberLouisiana ex. rel. Francis v. Resweber

Was the wooden paddle Was the wooden paddle cruel and unusual?cruel and unusual?

No!No!

The 8The 8thth Amendment protection from Amendment protection from cruel and unusual punishment is cruel and unusual punishment is limited to punishment for crimes. limited to punishment for crimes.

Unlike prisons, schools are open to the Unlike prisons, schools are open to the public. Unlike prisoners, students have public. Unlike prisoners, students have friends and teachers who see what is friends and teachers who see what is

going on. going on.

No!No!

If a school goes to far in punishing a If a school goes to far in punishing a student, it could be sued, or the teacher student, it could be sued, or the teacher could face criminal charges. There is no could face criminal charges. There is no need for 8need for 8thth Amendment protection in Amendment protection in

schools. schools.

Ingraham v. Wright

Was not doing an X-Ray Was not doing an X-Ray cruel and unusual?cruel and unusual?

No!No!

It is cruel and unusual punishment if a It is cruel and unusual punishment if a prison purposely ignores a prisoner’s prison purposely ignores a prisoner’s serious injury or illness, because that serious injury or illness, because that

would inflict unnecessary suffering and would inflict unnecessary suffering and pain. In this case, the prisoner saw pain. In this case, the prisoner saw

the doctor many times. He was the doctor many times. He was treated for his back injury as well as treated for his back injury as well as other medical problems. It may have other medical problems. It may have been bad medical judgment for the been bad medical judgment for the doctor not to perform an X-ray, but doctor not to perform an X-ray, but

that is not cruel and unusual that is not cruel and unusual punishment. punishment. Estelle v. Gamble

Was it cruel and unusual Was it cruel and unusual for the judge to give the for the judge to give the death penalty without death penalty without looking at the boy’s looking at the boy’s

troubled past?troubled past?

yes!yes!Before sentencing someone to Before sentencing someone to

death for a crime, it is important death for a crime, it is important to make sure that death is the to make sure that death is the

appropriate punishment. A judge appropriate punishment. A judge cannot refuse to consider special cannot refuse to consider special circumstances that would affect circumstances that would affect whether the death penalty is an whether the death penalty is an appropriate punishment for the appropriate punishment for the

crime. crime.

Eddings v. Oklahoma

Was it cruel and unusual for Was it cruel and unusual for the state law to allow the the state law to allow the death penalty but prohibit death penalty but prohibit

looking at special looking at special circumstances?circumstances?

yes!yes!Before sentencing someone to death Before sentencing someone to death for a crime, it is important to make for a crime, it is important to make sure that death is the appropriate sure that death is the appropriate

punishment. There cannot be a law punishment. There cannot be a law that stops the judge from that stops the judge from

considering special circumstances considering special circumstances that affect whether the death that affect whether the death

penalty is appropriate for the crime. penalty is appropriate for the crime.

Bell v. Ohio

Was it cruel and unusual Was it cruel and unusual to give the death penalty to give the death penalty

to someone under 18?to someone under 18?

yes!yes!A person under the age of 18 deserves A person under the age of 18 deserves

less punishment than an adult. less punishment than an adult. Teenagers are less experienced, less Teenagers are less experienced, less disciplined, and more vulnerable than disciplined, and more vulnerable than

adults. They respond more to peer adults. They respond more to peer pressure, and they have more potential pressure, and they have more potential

to grow and change. It is cruel and to grow and change. It is cruel and unusual punishment to give the death unusual punishment to give the death

penalty to a person under 18. penalty to a person under 18.

Roper v. Simmons

Was beating up the Was beating up the prisoner cruel and unusual prisoner cruel and unusual

if the injuries were not if the injuries were not serious?serious?

yes!yes!Prison guards may have to use force Prison guards may have to use force

to keep order, but they are not to keep order, but they are not allowed to hurt prisoners on allowed to hurt prisoners on

purpose. If prison guards purpose. If prison guards maliciously use force to cause harm, maliciously use force to cause harm, they violate the 8they violate the 8thth Amendment. It Amendment. It

doesn’t matter whether the doesn’t matter whether the prisoner’s injuries are serious or prisoner’s injuries are serious or

not. not.

Hudson v. McMillian

Is second-hand smoke Is second-hand smoke cruel and unusual? cruel and unusual?

MAYBE!MAYBE!

Prison officials may not ignore a Prison officials may not ignore a condition that could lead to serious condition that could lead to serious health problems. If a prisoner was health problems. If a prisoner was

locked in his cell with a heavy locked in his cell with a heavy smoker against his will, that could smoker against his will, that could violate the 8violate the 8thth amendment. In this amendment. In this

case, the prisoner was no longer in a case, the prisoner was no longer in a cell with a heavy smoker. Also, the cell with a heavy smoker. Also, the prison had a policy to respect the prison had a policy to respect the

wishes of non-smokers. wishes of non-smokers. Helling v. McKinney

(But not in this case)(But not in this case)