ROPER V. SIMMONS | sc-case-analysis

Roper v. Simmons

Simmons:
Summary/Analysis
At the age of 17, a junior in high school, Christopher Simmons murdered a woman. This woman happened to be Shirley Crook, a woman that was involved in a car accident with Christopher Simmons prior to the murder. Nine months later, at the age of 18, Christopher Simmons was tried and sentenced to death. The evidence against him was substantial as he himself, confessed his crime. He even went through his plan and agreed to act out his actions that night on video. Although he committed the murder, he wasn’t alone. He planned the heinous crime with friends John Tessmer and Charles Benjamin. Although John Tessmer dropped out of the plan last minute, the other two continued with the plan. The duo broke in Shirley Crook’s house and tied her up. They then proceeded to duct tape her body and face and drove her to the state park, in which they reinforced the bindings and threw her over the bridge to drown her. Since Simmons committed the act when he was 17, he was outside the jurisdiction of the Missouri juvenile court system.

Roper:
Summary/Analysis
Christopher Simmons’ age was brought up and was addressed by the trial judge so that it could be a mitigating factor in the penalty he was to receive. The jury went for the death penalty and the trial judge imposed it. Christopher Simmons’ new counsel of pointed out that had ineffective assistance at trial. The new counsel then proceeded to provided witnesses consisting of his friends, neighbors, and clinical psychologists that have evaluated him to attest to Christopher Simmons’ troubled background and nature. Christopher Simmon’s postconviction counsel disputed that this should have been brought up in the sentencing proceeding. The trial court denied the motion for postconviction relief since they found no constitutional violation by reason of ineffective assistance of counsel. The Supreme court stated that since “a national consensus has developed against the execution of juvenile offenders... the juvenile death penalty has become truly unusual over the last decade.”

Outcome:
The Supreme court opted out of the death penalty and instead, sentence Christopher Simmons to life imprisonment without eligibility for probation, parole, or release except by act of the Governor.

Majority Decision Summary:
By a vote of 5-4, the Supreme Court ruled that the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments protected the offender of under the age of 18 from receiving the death penalty. Justice Kennedy stated that when a juvenile offender commits a heinous crime, the State can exact forfeiture of some of the basic liberties, but the State cannot extinguish his life and his potential to attain a mature understanding of his own humanity. Basically, the Court reaffirmed that necessity of referring to “the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society” to determine which punishments have reached the status of being cruel and unusual.

Dissenting Opinion Summary:
One dissent came from Justice Scalia, joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist, Justice Thomas and Justice O’Connor. The dissent questioned whether a “national consensus” had indeed formed among the states. The fact that only 18 out of 38 death penalty states prohibited the death penalty for juveniles.

Commentary:
I am somewhat conflicted with the outcome of this case. Although I do agree that the Supreme Court should constantly adjust to accommodate for certain conditions and punishments, I disagree with the punishment given. I know that sounds cruel since we are talking about someone’s life here. But I can’t help but think of the saying, “an eye for an eye.” Christopher Simmons’s actions proved that he was suited for the penalty. The evidence was substantial. This is harsh, but he deserved to die. His bragging and pitiful reasoning behind the murder didn’t convince me to otherwise think of a better punishment. Why fill our prisons and waste our tax dollars to keep a man such as this alive? The notion that an 18 year old is wildly more mature than an 17 year old is absurd to me. One year cannot distinguish whether someone is ready to be an adult or not. That is why I also disagree with the idea that 18 is the magic number in the U.S. At the end of the day, it comes down to being able to distinguish “right” from “wrong”. If a 5 year old can make out the difference, I think a 17 year old could too. Since I am 17 years old, I can attest to this. I am well aware of my actions and fully understand the concept of wrong decisions resulting in consequences.