CB State v. Ervin - 3 Punishment go beyond what is...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
State v. Ervin 577 A.2d 1273 (1990) Fact: Operative Facts: Joseph Ervins had shared some cocaine with his girlfriend. She died as a result of it. The courts charged him for Possessing cocaine with intent to distribute it, distributing cocaine, causing a drug induced death, and manslaughter. Issue: Was the statute of felony crime through drug induced death, violate the due process of law and is cruel and unusual punishment? Rule: Test for Cruel and Unusual punishment. 1) Does the punishment for crime conform with contemporary standards of decency? 2) Punishment grossly disproportionate to the offense?
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: 3) Punishment go beyond what is necessary to accomplish any penological objective? Due Process Law: must not be too remote in its occurrence as to have a just bearing on the defendant’s liability and too dependent upon conduct of another person as to have a just bearing on defendant’s liability. Rational: The death from certain illegal substance did not meet the test of cruel and unusual punishment at the time and the due process law. Holding: No, it wasn’t. Synthesis: Dissent/Concurrences:...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online