Tison v. Arizona: Justice O'Connor Creates a New Standard of Culpability for Capital Crimes

Abstract

INTRODUCTION|One experiences tremendous feelings of moral outrage when first confronted with knowledge of the senseless murders of a family of four persons, including a two-year old child, in the middle of the Arizona desert. Retribution can naturally be expected as society's instinctive reaction to such crimes. Though retribution is one of the accepted social purposes of punishment, it must not be permitted to dominate the equally important social purpose of deterrence of crimes. In order to serve both purposes effectively, the administration of criminal law requires that the desire for retribution be channeled to promote the stability of a society which has chosen to govern itself by law rather than by passion. Enlightened reason, detachment, and independence from competing pressures of the day are hallmarks of the judiciary which make it uniquely qualified to ensure that retributive instincts manifest themselves in appropriate criminal sanctions. These qualities have found their expression in the development of standards regarding proportionality between crime and punishment and requirements of individualized consideration for capital punishment...