Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Death penalty

Major rulings

By wire services
Published March 2, 2005

THE DEATH PENALTY The Supreme Court splits 5-4 in a case that takes three inmates off death row in Florida. Main story Graphic: State by state For young D.C. sniper, no chance of death row What it means to ... Pasco killer may escape death penalty Excerpts from the ruling Major rulings

Florida inmates James Bonifay, 31 Age at time of crime: 17 Crime: In Pensacola in 1991, Bonifay meant to kill a clerk at an auto parks store whom Bonifay's cousin blamed for getting him fired. But the clerk called in sick and was replaced by Billy Wayne Coker, whom Bonifay shot and killed. What ruling means: Bonifay could be eligible for parole in about 10 years, but he also was sentenced to life in prison for robbery. He will not be eligible for parole if the sentences are consecutive. If they aren't, he will be. Cleo LeCroy, 41 Age at time of crime: 17 Crime: In January 1981, LeCroy fatally shot a newlywed couple from Miami-Dade who were camping in rural Palm Beach County south of Lake Okeechobee. The bodies of John and Gail Hardeman were found about a week after they didn't return home. John Hardeman had been shot in the head; Gail Hardeman had been shot in the head, neck and chest. What ruling means: LeCroy will be eligible for parole in a few years. Nathan Ramirez, 27 Age at time of crime: 17 Crime: He killed Mildred Boroski, a 71-year-old widow, in 1995. She was in bed at her Pasco County home when Ramirez and a friend broke in. They tied her up, killed her dog and looted the house. Ramirez shot Boroski twice in the head. What ruling means: Ramirez will never be eligible for parole because his crime occurred after a 1994 law that denies parole eligibility for people convicted of first-degree murder.

1972, FURMAN VS. GEORGIA: The court rules the death penalty does not violate the Constitution, but the manner of its application in many states does. The court noted that capital punishment was likely to be imposed in a discriminatory way and that blacks were far more likely to be executed than whites. The decision essentially ends the practice of executions.

1976, GREGG VS. GEORGIA: A Georgia death penalty statute is held constitutional, a ruling that sets the stage for resumption of executions.

1987, MCCLESKEY VS. GEORGIA: Justices rule state death penalty laws are constitutional even when statistics indicate they have been applied in racially biased ways.

1988, THOMPSON VS. OKLAHOMA: The court decides people younger than 16 when they committed a crime may not be executed.

1989, STANFORD VS. KENTUCKY: Justices uphold the constitutionality of executions for juveniles older than 15.

2002, ATKINS VS. VIRGINIA: Justices rule that executing mentally retarded criminals violates the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Writing for the majority, Justice John Paul Stevens cites a "national consensus" against executing a killer who may lack the intelligence to fully understand his crime.

2005, ROPER VS. SIMMONS: The court rules the Constitution forbids the execution of killers who were under 18 when they committed their crimes, ending a practice used in 19 states. Justice Anthony Kennedy cites a "national consensus" against the practice.

[Last modified March 2, 2005, 04:25:03]