Lockett v. Ohio

E299484

Lockett v. Ohio is a 1978 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly expanded the range of mitigating factors a sentencer must be allowed to consider before imposing the death penalty.

All labels observed (1)

Label Occurrences
Lockett v. Ohio canonical 2

How this entity was disambiguated

Statements (49)

Predicate Object
instanceOf Eighth Amendment case ⓘ
United States Supreme Court case ⓘ
capital punishment case ⓘ
constitutional law case ⓘ
criminal law case ⓘ
areaOfLaw criminal procedure ⓘ
death penalty jurisprudence ⓘ
arguedDate 1978-03-28 ⓘ
1978-03-29 ⓘ
citation 438 U.S. 586 ⓘ
concurrenceBy Byron R. White ⓘ
surface form: Justice Byron R. White

Harry A. Blackmun ⓘ
surface form: Justice Harry A. Blackmun

Lewis F. Powell Jr. ⓘ
surface form: Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Potter Stewart ⓘ
surface form: Justice Potter Stewart

Thurgood Marshall ⓘ
surface form: Justice Thurgood Marshall

William J. Brennan Jr. ⓘ
surface form: Justice William J. Brennan Jr.
concurrenceInJudgmentBy John Paul Stevens ⓘ
surface form: Justice John Paul Stevens
constitutionalProvisionInterpreted Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ
Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ
surface form: Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
country United States of America ⓘ
surface form: United States
court Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
decisionDate 1978-07-03 ⓘ
dissentBy William H. Rehnquist ⓘ
surface form: Justice William H. Rehnquist
docketNumber 76-6997 ⓘ
fullName Lockett v. Ohio self-link ⓘ
holding Ohio’s death penalty statute was unconstitutional because it narrowly limited the mitigating factors the sentencer could consider. ⓘ
The Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments require that the sentencer in a capital case not be precluded from considering any aspect of a defendant’s character or record and any circumstances of the offense as mitigating factors. ⓘ
impact significantly expanded the range of mitigating factors that must be admissible in capital sentencing ⓘ
joinedPlurality Harry A. Blackmun ⓘ
surface form: Justice Harry A. Blackmun

Lewis F. Powell Jr. ⓘ
surface form: Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Potter Stewart ⓘ
surface form: Justice Potter Stewart
jurisdiction Ohio ⓘ
legalIssue scope of mitigating evidence in capital sentencing ⓘ
majorityOpinionBy Warren E. Burger ⓘ
surface form: Chief Justice Warren E. Burger
page 586 ⓘ
petitioner Sandra Lockett ⓘ
pluralityOpinionBy Warren E. Burger ⓘ
surface form: Chief Justice Warren E. Burger
precedentFor requirement that capital sentencers may consider any relevant mitigating evidence ⓘ
relatedCase Eddings v. Oklahoma ⓘ
Furman v. Georgia ⓘ
Gregg v. Georgia ⓘ
Woodson v. North Carolina ⓘ
reporter United States Reports ⓘ
respondent Ohio ⓘ
surface form: State of Ohio
result death sentence vacated ⓘ
stateLawAtIssue Ohio capital punishment statute ⓘ
subsequentHistory remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion ⓘ
volume 438 ⓘ
yearDecided 1978 ⓘ

How these facts were elicited

Referenced by (2)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Gregg v. Georgia → followedBy → Lockett v. Ohio ⓘ
Lockett v. Ohio → fullName → Lockett v. Ohio self-link ⓘ