amendment8

1.Justine Collins 2.Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957 (1991), 3. Because he had 650 grams of cocaine, Ronald Harmelin was sentenced to life in prison without possibility of parole. Harmelin challenged his sentence as cruel and unusual. 4. As such, while Harmelin's life sentence may have been cruel, it was not constitutionally unusual. 5. You can't punish someone so sever that it is not fair.

1.Kylie Francisco 2.Arizona vs. California (2000) 3.How much water from the Colorado river was Arizona was entitled to? 4.California got 50% of the river. Arizona got 46% of the river. 5. They are still working out all the details with court cases.

1. Matt Drozd 2. Woodson v. North Carolina 3. In Carolina death sentence had been made mandatory for the crime of 1st degree murder 4. The mandatory death sentence was found unconstitutional 5. You cannot put a mandatory death sentence on 1st degree murder

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> 1. Sam Bird 2. Thompson v. Oklahoma 3. William Thompson murdered his brother-in-law who had been abusing his sister. He was 15 years-old. The Oklahoma law said that Thompson was a minor, thereby recieved a reduced sentence and other considerations. Thompson was convinced of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. 4. The ruling was appealled going to the Supreme Court.The Supreme Court overturned the death sentence, holding that "the 8th amendment and 14th amendment prohibits the executionof a person who was under 16 years- old at the time of his/her offence". 5. The court thereby ruled that applying the death penalty to a 15 year old child was prohibited under the Constitution's cruel and unusual punishment clause. <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Alexander vs. United states- Mandie Nick

Mariel is doing Walton vs. Arizona

1.Devin O 2. Proffitt v Florida 3. Proffitt was convicted of murder in the first degree and sentenced to death under a court in Florida. He appealed under the eighth amendment saying that the death punishment was unconstitutional. 4. In a 7-2 majority, the court ruled that the death penalty was not unconstitutional. 5. This decision means that people will continue to die in Florida and our government will continue to say that this is okay.

Claireee is doinnn: STANFORD V. KENTUCKY 1989

1. Eryk Banatt 2.Louisiana ex rel. Francis v. Resweber (1946) 3. A man was found guilty of first degree murder and was sentenced to death via the electric chair. he was placed in the chair and shocked, but not killed. He was sent back to prison and they tried to get a warrant for a second attempt. This was under the eighth amendment because he claimed being shocked twice violated the 8th amendment right to no cruel or unusual punishment. 4. The jury decided that a second warrant for death would not violate the cruel or unusual punishment right, and they granted the warrant to the second attempt. 5. This impacts our country because once you're on the chair, even if it breaks, it's inescapable. You will die on that chair.

1. Chris West 2. Lockyer vs. Andrade, 2003 3. A man was accused of stealing 5 video cassets at a k-mart and then stealing 4 at another k-mart. these were his 2nd and 3rd strikes. in california there is a rule called the 3 strikes rulewerte you get 3 strikes and then you go to jail. This case challanges the 8th amendment because the judge gave this man 50 years in prision when with the state law of 3 strikes shows he clearly should had only 25 years. 4. The decission when this man appealed this court case was that he was only in for 25 years 5. This decission meant that his 8th amendment rights were violated.

1.Claire Romine 2.Ake v. Oklahoma (1985) 3. A man was charged with first degree murder. At the trial his behavior was really bizarre so the judge sent him to a psychiatrist. The psychiatrist sent him to a mental hospital and 6 weeks later petitioner found that he has been on an antipsychotic drug. When they resumed the trial the psychiatrist examined him and he said that he was to dangerous to society. Therefore he should be sentenced to death. 4. The jury rejected the insanity defense and he was convicted of all courts. When they were trying to figure out his punishement the state asked if he could be sentenced to death according to the murder and future dangerous behavior. He had no witness and commited a bad murder so he was sentenced to death and he should have asked for a new trial but he didn't. 5. The decision meant that if you have been on a drug commited 1st degree murder then you might be sentenced to murder. Luckily he was killed or else he could have hurt somebody even worse and he could have been dangerous to the society.

1. Samantha Moornhineway 2. Trop v. Dulles(1958) 3. Trop applied for a passport, which was denied because it provided that members of the military forces of the United States who deserted would lose their citizenship. 4.The Supreme Court decided, 5-4, that it was unconstitutional for the government to cancel the citizenship of a U.S. citizen as a punishment. 5. It impacted the country beacuse if you didn't have any citizenship you wouldnt be acting as a citizen to the country

= = = =

= = 1. Rachel Sanford 2.35 states vs people (electric chair) 3. 35 states wanted to have the electric chair s a punishment. this is violating amendment one because it violates no cruel or unusual punishment. 4. the court case desion was to not use the electric chair. the courts thought that was way to bad of a punishment. 5. the impact it had on the country was a good impact. at first they were scared and didn't know what to do. now that that law was not passed, people feel more safe and are very glad that the 8th amendment was passed.

1. Mitchell Fliss 2. Coker vs. Georgia (1977) 3. Ehrlich Anthony Coker serving a number of sentences for murder, rape, kidnapping, and assault, escaped from prison. He later asulted a young woman and stole the familys car. He was later back in prison. 4. In a 7-to-2 decision, the Court held that the death penalty was a "grossly disproportionate" punishment for the crime of rape. The Court said that nearly all states at that time didn't impose such a harsh penalty, with Georgia being the only state that authorized death for the rape of an adult woman. Because rape did not involve the taking of another human life, the Court found the death penalty excessive 5. This shows the country that people, all people know the dealth penalty is horrible and unusual.

1.Tanya Townsend 2.Ropper v. Simmons, 2005 3.Christopher Simmons began a plot to murder Shirely Crook. He was 17 and also got two younger boys involved. The three met in the middle of the night when one boy dropped out of the plan. The other two broke into the house, tied her hands together, covered her eyes, and threw her off of a bridge. He was under the age of 18 and was convicted as an juvinial. The judge thought this would be under the eighth amendment of cruel and unusual punishment. 4. Simmons was almost sentanced to the death penalty, but was under the age of 18. 5.Now the court treats children and adults differently. If they did not then Simmons would have been sentanced to the death penalty. The Supreme court ruled that criminals under the age of 18 shall not be sentanced to the death penalty.

1. Juhie Patel 2. Furman v. Geaorgis (1972) 3. A victom returned to his home while William Henry Furman was robbing from it. While Furman tried to escape he tripped and his weapon accidentely fired. One of the people who lived in that home was shot and then he/she died. When Furman went to trial fvor murder he was found guilty. 4. Furman was sentenced to death. The case was split 5 to 4 for imposing the death penalty. Justices Brennan and Marshal argued that death penalty was a cruel and unusual punishment. 5. It was decided that death penalty was cruel and unusual punishment.

1.Brad Pettigrew 2.Gregg v. Georgia 1976 3.Gregg was sentenced to the death penalty after he committed murder and armed robbery, but argued that it was against the 8th amendment. 4.The court ruled that the death penalty was allowed by the Constitution. 5.The decision meant that criminals could still get the death penalty. People throughout the country might face the the death penalty if they committed a bad enough crime.

Eric Smuda is doing Hope vs. Pelzer 2002 1. Eric Smuda 2. Hope vs. Pelzer (2002) 3. The reason why the amendment was challenged is because Hope was tied to a metal pole for seven hours with only one water break while in the chain gang. The only reason why the officer tied him against the pole was because he was being disruptive. This, in Hopes mind was cruel and unusual pinishment. 4. The case was discarded in 2005 by a Supreme Court Judge. The reason why it was discarded is because Hope failed to convince the jury it was a cruel and unusual punishment. 5. This decision meant that both Hope and Pelzer were not going to be punished. The impact it had on our country is, to show criminals that they can still not be treated unfairly.

1. Austin Giardullo 2. Robinson v. California(1962) 3. Robinson was pulled over and the police men noticed "tracks" on his arm. He argued that he never took drugs but it didn't work he was sentenced to 90 days in prison. The court then brought up that putting a man with the "illness" of drug addiction was cruel and unusual punishment. 4. In a 6-to-2 decision, the Court said that laws imprisoning people afflicted with the "illness" of drug addiction inflicted cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the 8th amendment. Robinson was a free man. 5. The Court compared the law to one making it a criminal offense to be mentally ill, or a leper and argued that the state could not punish persons merely because of their "status" of disease or addiction.

1. Jess Brucker 2. Bell v. Ohio 1978 3. Man murdered another man during a kidnapping and was sentenced death. Ohio Supreme Court said it violated his Ohio Death Penalty rights. 4. The judgment was reversed to such an extent and it upheld the death penalty, and the case remanded. 5. The decision ment that the case was put on hold until further notice. It impacted our country because it showed that some people were happy because the death penalty could come in play.

1.David C. 2.United States District Court for the Northern District of California(1992) 3.Gomez believes his sentance to death by lethal gas is cruel and unusual and therefore violates the 8th Amendment. 4.Gomez was still executed. 5.At the time, that was still legal, but we now know that it is cruel and unusual.

sam bird is doing Thompson v. Oklahoma

Tyler Roy Coleman Vs. Thompson 1991 Coleman was found guilty of capital murder (murdering a fireman of peace officer) and sentenced to death. He appealed to the County Circuit Court for cruel and unusual punishment. The Supreme court decided that appeals must be filed in 30 days or less. He was put to death. It changed the country because now criminals know that they must file an appeal in 30 days or less.

1.Chrissy Scaglione 2. Solem v. Helm(1983) 3. Jerry Helm was accused and found guilty of writing a "no account" check, with the punishment of a five year jail sentence. However, being that this was his seventh felony conviction in South Dakota, he was sentenced to a life of imprisonment. Helm brought this case to court, and eventually to the Supreme Court, persuading that the decision went against the Eighth Amendment. 4. In a 5-4 decision,

__Austin G. is doing Robinson vs. California__ Cameron K is doing Baze vs. Rees ( 9/25/07)

1. Mariel Householder 2. Walton v. Arizona 1986 3. He was accused of murder 4. Death Sentence.-Realized sentencing scheme was against the Constitution.The Court agreed to review Walton's case in order to resolve this split. 5. The death penalty is very serious and she be taken seriously when dealing with it.

1.Rushi Patel 2.Kimbrough //v//. United States(2007) 3.There is guideline for drug realted offenses. This was known as the Crack cocaine to cocaine 1:100 ratio. That means if you are cought with 1 gram of crack cocaine you can be charged with possesion of 100 grams of regular cocaine. Kimbrough had 50 grams of Crack cocaine and was found guilty. The judge cut ten years off this sentence. It was brought up to the Supreme Court because in Kimbrough's case the judge thought it was cruel punishment and prosecuters argued the judge violated court procedures. 4. The court found that it was a cruel punishment and Kimbrough should have 10 years cut off his sentence. 5. This impacated the country because now the guideline is less influenced, so the 1:100 ratio is rarely used. Also, it allowed thousands of criminals to apply for appeal on their drug possesion charges.

1. Lindsay Muhs 2. Ewing vs. California, 2003 3. Did the punishment fit the crime? Under California law someone who is convicted of three felony crimes is sentenced to life in prison without parole. This is known as the " Three Strikes and you're Out" law. Ewing stole $1,200 worth of golf clubs. This was his third felony conviction. The question for the Supreme Court was whether the state law was cruel and unusual punishment. 4. The decision of the Supreme Court was that it was not cruel and unusual punishment. 5. There are many things that could happen to the country because of this. One is that jail populations will go up.

Kristin H. is doing Weems vs. U.S.

1. Ali Surdoval 2. Ingraham v. Wright 1977 3. Two students in Florida were paddled in a public school without a being heard first. The students felt that it was a “cruel and unusual punishment” and they had the right to a hearing first. 4. In a 5-4 decision, the court decided that the public school did have the right to paddle the two students without a hearing. The court pointed out that the Eight Amendment had always been used with the punishment of convicted criminals. The Amendment did not apply to school discipline. Justice Byron White did argue that saying that the word "criminal" was not in the Eight Amendment so the court should not enforce that limitation. However, the court stayed with their first thought. 5. This case made it okay to paddle or physically punish children in a public school.

1. Danny Da Silva 2. Lance T. Wilkerson vs. Auditing Division, Utah State Tax Commission 3. Wilkerson, a citizen in Utah had been convicted of murder in the first degree and sentenced to death. but Wilkerson fought and said that the Death Penalty was unconstitutional by the 8th amendment. 4. He was partially granted appeal but the Supreme Court sia dthat the Death Penalty is legall 5. This court case allowed the Death Penalty to all murderers of the first degree Haley C. is doing Domino's pizza vs. John McDonald

Sam magalotti-woodson vs.north carolinia

Alex Cervino Trop v. Dulles, 1958 Albert L. Trop had his citizenship taken away, he brought it to court saying that it was cruel and unusual. The Supreme Court decided, 5-4, that it was unconstitutional for the government to cancel the citizenship of a U.S. citizen as a punishment

salerno v. U.S. tom hildebrand

1 Andrew Kero //2// February 20, 2002, Atkins vs Virginia 3 Atkins was convicted of capital murder and related crimes by a Virginia jugde. 4 He told the jury that he could not be sentenced to death because he is mentally retarded. 5 The impact that it made on the country was, he was sentanced to death, but the 8th amendment prevents for cruel and unusual punishment.

//Kayla's Doing-// Hudson v. McMillian 1. Kayla Weinstein 2. Hudson v. McMillian (1992) 3. There was psyical force against a prisoner and this may violate protection against cruel and unusual punishment. Even though the victim did not suffer any serious ot permanent damage/injury. 4. The Supreme Court decision where the Court on a 7-2 vote held that the use of excessive physical force against a prisoner may constitute cruel and unusual punishment even though the inmate does not suffer serious injury. 5. The decision means that the person who beat the victim was found guilty of using cruel punishment against the prisoner. The impact it had on our country was that any prison workers would not be able to pysically use any cruel or unusual punishment against prisoners.

=__Maya:__ [|Rummel vs. Estelle]= Backround: In the year 1980, William James Rummel was convicted of three felonies. He was given a life sentence mandated by Texas recidivist statute. His crimes involved approximately $230, although all of his crimes were nonviolent. Lower courts denied Rummel's challenge to sentence. Decision: In a 5-4 decision, the court held that the life sentence that was imposed by the Texas law did not constitute cruel and unusual punishment under the 8th and 14th amendments. Change: This decision changed the way people interpret the 8th amendment. = = = = = = = = =1.Tayler Bramley= 2. Arizoniav. California (2000) 3. This amendment was challenged because California wanted to have the right to use the colorado river. The United States intervened, seeking water rights on behalf of five Indian reservations. 4.The supreme courts decision was that both sides were rejected. 5. The decision means, if there is ever another arguement about water situations, the case would be sent to Special Master for a determination on the merits.

Marki is doing Harmelin v. Michigan

Sean L is doing Robinson v.s California

Lauren is doing [|//Helling v. McKinney// **(1993)**]

Elizabeth Frye- Estelle vs Gamble 1976

1. Tommy Cerene 2.MILLER, SUPERINTENDENT, PENDLETON CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, //v.// FRENCH //.// 3. In 1996, Congress enacted the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PLRA), which sets a standard for the entry and deletion of prospective relief in civil actions challenging prison conditions. The PLRA provides that a motion to delete such relief "shall operate as a stay" of that relief beginning 30 days after the motion is filed and ending when the court rules on the motion. 4. Yes and no. In a 5-4 5. This means that the PLRA can provide the "shall operate as a stay"

Jon D'Agati is doing Enmund v. Florida

1.jack cubberly 2.domino pizza ink et al v. mcdonald 3.debby Pear made raceist comments agenst an owener of Dominos Pizza in Las vagas. (John Mcdonalds) 4.In the end JMW won the case over John Mcdonald 5.the impact was that you have to follow the contract and be carefull how you talk to people.

1.brian english 2.McGowan v. Maryland(1961) 3. 8

MATT DROZD [|//Woodson v. North Carolina//]

Alexander vs. United states- Mandie Nick

Mariel is doing Walton vs. Arizona

Devin O is doing Proffitt v Florida Claireee is doinnn: STANFORD V. KENTUCKY 1989

1. Eryk Banatt 2.Louisiana ex rel. Francis v. Resweber (1946) 3. A man was found guilty of first degree murder and was sentenced to death via the electric chair. he was placed in the chair and shocked, but not killed. He was sent back to prison and they tried to get a warrant for a second attempt. This was under the eighth amendment because he claimed being shocked twice violated the 8th amendment right to no cruel or unusual punishment. 4. The jury decided that a second warrant for death would not violate the cruel or unusual punishment right, and they granted the warrant to the second attempt. 5. This impacts our country because once you're on the chair, even if it breaks, it's inescapable. You will die on that chair.

//Chris West---Lockyer v. Andrade (2003)//

1.Claire Romine 2.Ake v. Oklahoma (1985) 3. A man was charged with first degree murder. At the trial his behavior was really bizarre so the judge sent him to a psychiatrist. The psychiatrist sent him to a mental hospital and 6 weeks later petitioner found that he has been on an antipsychotic drug. When they resumed the trial the psychiatrist examined him and he said that he was to dangerous to society. Therefore he should be sentenced to death. 4. The jury rejected the insanity defense and he was convicted of all courts. When they were trying to figure out his punishement the state asked if he could be sentenced to death according to the murder and future dangerous behavior. He had no witness and commited a bad murder so he was sentenced to death and he should have asked for a new trial but he didn't. 5. The decision meant that if you have been on a drug commited 1st degree murder then you might be sentenced to murder. Luckily he was killed or else he could have hurt somebody even worse and he could have been dangerous to the society.

sam mornhineway is dong.....[|//Trop v. Dulles//] ([|1958]) = = = =

= = Rachel Sanford- 35 states vs people (electric chair)

1. Mitchell Fliss 2. Coker vs. Georgia (1977) 3. 4. 5.

1.Tanya Townsend 2.Ropper v. Simmons, 2005 3.Christopher Simmons began a plot to murder Shirely Crook. He was 17 and also got two younger boys involved. The three met in the middle of the night when one boy dropped out of the plan. The other two broke into the house, tied her hands together, covered her eyes, and threw her off of a bridge. He was under the age of 18 and was convicted as an juvinial. The judge thought this would be under the eighth amendment of cruel and unusual punishment. 4. Simmons was almost sentanced to the death penalty, but was under the age of 18. 5.Now the court treats children and adults differently. If they did not then Simmons would have been sentanced to the death penalty. The Supreme court ruled that criminals under the age of 18 shall not be sentanced to the death penalty.

1. Juhie Patel 2. Furman v. Geaorgis (1972) 3. A victom returned to his home while William Henry Furman was robbing from it. While Furman tried to escape he tripped and his weapon accidentely fired. One of the people who lived in that home was shot and then he/she died. When Furman went to trial fvor murder he was found guilty. 4. Furman was sentenced to death. The case was split 5 to 4 for imposing the death penalty. Justices Brennan and Marshal argued that death penalty was a cruel and unusual punishment. 5. It was decided that death penalty was cruel and unusual punishment.

Brad is doing Gregg v. Georgia

Eric Smuda is doing Hope vs. Pelzer 2002 1. Eric Smuda 2. Hope vs. Pelzer (2002) 3. The reason why the amendment was challenged is because Hope was tied to a metal pole for seven hours with only one water break while in the chain gang. The only reason why the officer tied him against the pole was because he was being disruptive. This, in Hopes mind was cruel and unusual pinishment. 4. The case was discarded in 2005 by a Supreme Court Judge. The reason why it was discarded is because Hope failed to convince the jury it was a cruel and unusual punishment. 5. This decision meant that both Hope and Pelzer were not going to be punished. The impact it had on our country is, to show criminals that they can still not be treated unfairly.

1. Jess Brucker 2. Bell v. Ohio 1978 3. Man murdered another man during a kidnapping and was sentenced death. Ohio Supreme Court said it violated his Ohio Death Penalty rights. 4. The judgment was reversed to such an extent and it upheld the death penalty, and the case remanded. 5. It ment that the case was put on hold until further notice. It impacted that some people were happy because the death penalty could come in play.

David C is doing Gomez v. United States District Court for the Northern District of California

sam bird is doing Thompson v. Oklahoma

Tyler Roy Coleman Vs. Thompson 1991 A man committed capital murder ( murdering a peace officer or fireman) and was sentenced to death. He thought that it was cruel and unusual punishment, because he thought that he was being sentenced illegally. The judge ruled that it was a fair sentence, and Coleman was killed. This changed the country because now capital murder is charged with either the death penalty or a life sentence.

1. Chrissy Scaglione 2. Solem v. Helm (1983) 3. Jerry Helm was accused and found guilty of writing a "no account" check, with a punishment of five years in jail. However, since this was Helm's seventh felony in South Dakota, he was sentenced to a life of imprisonment instead. He brought this to court, and eventually to the Supreme Court. 4. In a 5-4 decision, the court said that Helm's previous crimes were all minor, and that the state had treated him more harshly than the state's more violent criminals. 5. We have learned that no one can give you a punishment to cruel or unusual for your crime.

__Austin G. is doing Robinson vs. California__ Cameron K is doing Baze vs. Rees ( 9/25/07)

1.Rushi Patel 2.Kimbrough //v//. United States(2007) 3.There is guideline for drug realted offences. This was known as the Crack cocaine to cocaine 1:100 ratio. That means if you are cought with 1 gram of crack cocaine you can be charged with possesion of 100 grams of regular cocaine. Kimbrough had 50 grams of Crack cocaine and was found guilty. The judge cut ten years off this sentence. It was brought up to the Supreme Court because in Kimbrough's case the judge he thought it was cruel punishment and prosecuters argued the judge violated court procedures. 4. The court found that it was a cruel punishment and Kimbrough should have 10 years cut off his sentence. 5. This impacated the country because now the guideline is less influenced, so the 1:100 ratio is rarely used. Also, it allowed thousands of criminals to apply for appeal on their drug possesion charges.

1. Lindsay Muhs 2. Ewing vs. California, 2003 3. Did the punishment fit the crime? Under California law someone who is convicted of three felony crimes is sentenced to life in prison without parole. This is known as the " Three Strikes and you're Out" law. Ewing stole $1,200 worth of golf clubs. This was his third felony conviction. The question for the Supreme Court was whether the state law was cruel and unusual punishment. 4. The decision of the Supreme Court was that it was not cruel and unusual punishment. 5. There are many things that could happen to the country because of this. One is that jail populations will go up.

1. Kristin Hart 2. Weems vs. U.S.(1910) 3. Weems was convicted of falsifying official records of the United States Coastguard which resulted in the government being defrauded of the total of 612 pesos. 4.The supreme court realized that this case conflicted with the fourteenth amendment. It was considered cruel and unusual punishment and Weems won his case. 5.This case impacted the country because now anybody who is thinking of falsifying official records will know what will happen.

1. Ali Surdoval 2. Ingraham v. Wright 1977 3. Two students in Florida were paddled in a public school without a being heard first. The students felt that it was a “cruel and unusual punishment” and they had the right to a hearing first. 4. In a 5-4 decision, the court decided that the public school did have the right to paddle the two students without a hearing. The court pointed out that the Eight Amendment had always been used with the punishment of convicted criminals. The Amendment did not apply to school dicipline. Justice Byron White did argue that saying that the word "criminal" was not in the Eight Amendment so the court should not enforce that limitaion. However, the court stayed with their first thought. 5. This case made it okay to paddle or physicaly punish children in a public school.

Danny D. is doing Wilkerson vs. Utah

Haley C. is doing Domino's pizza vs. John McDonald

1.Sam magalotti 2.woodson vs.north carolinia-1976 3.the amendment was challenged because they were going to use the death penalty for first-degree murder. 4.they could not use the death penalty in north carolina at all. 5.the decision ment that the death penalty was no longer allowed.

alex is doing trop v dolles

salerno v. U.S. tom hildebrand

Andrew Kero is doing //Atkins v. Virginia// //Kayla's Doing-// Hudson v. McMillian 1. Kayla Weinstein 2. Hudson v. McMillian (1992) 3. There was psyical force against a prisoner and this may violate protection against cruel and unusual punishment. Even though the victim did not suffer any serious ot permanent damage/injury. 4. The Supreme Court decision where the Court on a 7-2 vote held that the use of excessive physical force against a prisoner may constitute cruel and unusual punishment even though the inmate does not suffer serious injury. 5. The decision means that the person who beat the victim was found guilty of using cruel punishment against the prisoner. The impact it had on our country was that any prison workers would not be able to pysically use any cruel or unusual punishment against prisoners.

Maya: [|Rummel vs. Estelle] (1980)
__Facts of the case:__ William James Rummel was aressted for being convicted of three crimes over a period of fifteen years. All Rummel's crimes were non-violent, yet he was given a life prison statement under the Texas recidivist law. Lower courts rejected Rummel's challenge to sentence. __Decision:__ In a 5-4 decision, the court held the life sentence because they believed it went against the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment. __Affect on Future Cases:__ Rummel's case proves that punishments can be protected by the Eighth amendment. = = =1.Tayler Bramley= 2. Arizoniav. California (2000) 3. This amendment was challenged because California wanted to have the right to use the colorado river. The United States intervened, seeking water rights on behalf of five Indian reservations. 4.The supreme courts decision was that both sides were rejected. 5. The decision means, if there is ever another arguement about water situations, the case would be sent to Special Master for a determination on the merits.

1:Marki 2:Harmelin v. Michigan(1990) 3:The reason the amendment was challenged because Harmelin believed he received a cruel and unusual punishment for possessing 650 grams of cocaine. 4: The courts decision was a life in prison without a possible patrol. 5: this means cruel and unusual punishments are not necessarily crule Sean L is doing Robinson v.s California

Lauren is doing [|//Helling v. McKinney// **(1993)**]

1. Elizabeth Frye 2.Estelle vs. Gamble 1976 3. Estelle was recieved of a back injury. This was due to the punishment recieved for his commited crime. Although he was called guilty the punishment recieved violated his rights of the eighth amendment. 4. The court's decision was that the punishment of Estelle was tolerated and should of not taken place. 5. This decision means cruel and unusual punishment is unfair to the citizens of America. Now others will realize how big of an impact their actins may take. Maybe now they wont use harsh punishment to control a inoccent person.

tommy cerene- MILLER, SUPERINTENDENT, PENDLETON CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, //et al.// //v.// FRENCH //et al.//

1.Jon D'Agati 2.Enmund v. Flordia 3.Enmund sat in a car while accompliaces robbed and murdered an elderly couple. Enmund was charged with the death penalty. This was eventually brought to the Supreme Court because it was thought to be cruel and unusual punishment. 4.The end rusult was that it was cruel and unusual puishment because Enmund never actually killed or attemted to kill anyone. 5.The impact is that anyone else in his position will not get the death penalty.

1.jack cubberly 2.domino pizza ink et al v. mcdonald 3.debby Pear made raceist comments agenst an owener of Dominos Pizza in Las vagas. (John Mcdonalds) 4.In the end JMW won the case over John Mcdonald 5.the impact was that you have to follow the contract and be carefull how you talk to people.

John McDonald is an African American entrepreneur, he was the sole shareholder and president of JWM Investments Inc. (JWM) a company organized under Nevada law. JWM and Domino's Pizza entered into several contracts, under which JWM was to construct four restaurants in the Las Vegas area and then lease them to Domino's. McDonald said that after the first restaurant was built, Domino's agent refused to execute documents that the contracts required to facilitate JWM's bank financing, and convinced the Las Vegas Valley Water District to change its recorded ownership of the land slated for restaurant construction from JWM to Domino's (which McDonald managed to subsequently change back). McDonald wanted to see the contracts completed, but claimed that the agent threatened "serious consequences" if he did not back out. The agent was alleged to have said to McDonald "I don't like dealing with you people anyway," she did not explain yhe saying. The contracts were never completed, and at least in part because of that JWM filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

1.brian english 2.McGowan v. Maryland(1961) 3.


 * 1) Lauren Fabiano
 * 2) Helling v. McKinney 1958
 * 3) Respondent McKinney, a Nevada state prisoner, filed suit against petitioner prison officials, claiming that his involuntary exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) from his cellmate's and other inmates' cigarettes posed an unreasonable risk to his health, thus subjecting him to cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the [|Eighth Amendment].
 * 4) You had to deal with what was going on in your jail cell.
 * 5) There is nothing you can really do about what goes on in your jail cell, even though you shouldn’t be smoking in jail but you put yourself in that position of having to go to jail.

1.Drew Stirnweis. 2.Powerex Corp. v.s. Reliant engery servies Inc. 2007 3.There was an engery crisis in California in 200-2001 when power bills were very high and there were black outs so people sued the power companies. 4.The court decided that since Powerex Corp is owned by a company in a diffrent contery that they can't be sued. 5.That ment that Powerex Corp could not get sued.