Booth v. Maryland (482 U.S. 496)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 15, 1987 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 482 U.S. 496 · 107 S. Ct. 2529
- Decided
- June 15, 1987
- Term
- October Term 1986
- Vote
- 5–4
- Majority author
- Justice Powell
- Issue area
- Criminal Procedure
- Disposition
- Vacated and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
- Constitutional ruling
- State/territorial law held unconstitutional
Opinion excerpt
Justice Powell delivered the opinion of the Court. The question presented is whether the Constitution prohibits a jury from considering a “victim impact statement” during the sentencing phase of a capital murder trial. I — I In 1983, Irvin Bronstein, 78, and his wife Rose, 75, were robbed and murdered in their West Baltimore home. The murderers, John Booth and Willie Reid, entered the victims’ home for the apparent purpose of stealing money to buy heroin. Booth, a neighbor of the Bronsteins, knew that the elderly couple could identify him. The victims were bound and gagged, and then stabbed repeatedly in the chest with a kitchen knife. The bodies were discovered two days later by the Bronsteins’ son. A jury found Booth guilty of two counts of first-degree murder, two counts of robbery, and conspiracy to commit robbery. The prosecution requested the death penalty, and Booth elected to have his sentence determined by the jury instead of the judge. See Md. Ann. Code, Art. 27, § 413(b) (1982). Before the sentencing phase began, the State Division of Parole and Probation (DPP) compiled a presentence report that described Booth’s background, education and employment history, and criminal record. Under a Maryland statute, the presentence report in all felony cases also must include a victim impact statement (VIS), describing the effect of the crime on the victim and his family. Md.…
Excerpt of a 48,902-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.