| Wainwright v. Witt | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued October 4, 1984 Decided March 5, 1985 | |
| Full case name | Johnny Paul Witt, et al. v. Louie L. Wainwright, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections et al. |
| Citations | 469 U.S. 412 (more) 93 S. Ct. 705; 35 L. Ed. 2d 147 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Witherspoon v. Illinois; set for reargument, 391 U.S. 510 (1968) |
| Subsequent | Rehearing denied, 470 U.S. 1039 (1985) |
| Holding | |
| Juror can be excused from jury due to beliefs on capital punishment during the voir dire. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Rehnquist, joined by Burger, White, Blackmun, Powell, O'Connor |
| Concurrence | Stevens |
| Dissent | Brennan, joined by Marshall |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amends. VI, XIV | |
Wainwright vs. Witt, 469 U.S. 412 (1985), was a U.S. Supreme Court case concerning a criminal defendant, Johnny Paul Witt, who argued that his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated when he was sentenced to death for first degree murder by the state of Florida. He argued that the trial court had unconstitutionally hand-picked a jury during the voir dire process.[1] This was because certain people were excused from the jury because they admitted pre-trial, that their decision of guilty or not guilty toward capital punishment would be swayed due to personal or religious beliefs.[2]