Simmons v. South Carolina

Simmons v. South Carolina
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued January 18, 1994
Decided June 17, 1994
Full case nameSimmons v. South Carolina
Citations512 U.S. 154 (more)
114 S. Ct. 2187; 129 L. Ed. 2d 133
Case history
Prior310 S.C. 439, 427 S.E.2d 175 (1993); cert. granted, 510 U.S. 811 (1993).
Holding
Where a capital defendant's future dangerousness is at issue, and the only sentencing alternative to death is life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, due process entitles the defendant to inform the jury of his future parole ineligibility.
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
Harry Blackmun · John P. Stevens
Sandra Day O'Connor · Antonin Scalia
Anthony Kennedy · David Souter
Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Case opinions
PluralityBlackmun, joined by Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg
ConcurrenceSouter, joined by Stevens
ConcurrenceGinsburg
ConcurrenceO'Connor (in judgment), joined by Rehnquist, Kennedy
DissentScalia, joined by Thomas

Simmons v. South Carolina, 512 U.S. 154 (1994), is a United States Supreme Court case holding that, where a capital defendant's future dangerousness is at issue, and the only alternative sentence available is life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, the sentencing jury must be informed that the defendant is ineligible for parole.[1]

After being found guilty of murder, Jonathan Dale Simmons faced either execution or life in prison without parole.[2] The State asked the jury to sentence Mr. Simmons to death, in part because he posed a future danger to society.[3] Although Mr. Simmons repeatedly requested permission to instruct the jury that he would never be released from prison, these requests were denied by the trial court.[4] Denying Mr. Simmons his requested instruction violated his due process rights, the Supreme Court held, and presented to the jury a "false choice between sentencing petitioner to death and sentencing him to a limited period of incarceration."[5]

Although Simmons was a plurality opinion, the Supreme Court has repeatedly reaffirmed its holding.[6][7][8]

  1. ^ "Simmons v. South Carolina, 512 U.S. 154, 156 (1994)". Justia Law. Retrieved February 28, 2019.
  2. ^ Simmons, 512 U.S. at 156.
  3. ^ Simmons, 512 U.S. at 156-59.
  4. ^ Simmons, 512 U.S. at 158-160.
  5. ^ Simmons, 512 U.S. at 161.
  6. ^ "Shafer v. South Carolina", Wikipedia, September 4, 2018, retrieved February 28, 2019
  7. ^ Lynch v. Arizona, 136 S. Ct. 1818 (2016).
  8. ^ Ramdass v. Angelone, 530 U.S. 156, 165-66 (2000).