Citations 490 U.S. 805 (more) Date 1989 | Concurrence White | |
Full case name Demitrius Gathers v. Tennessee Prior history Certiorari to the Supreme Court of South Carolina Majority Brennan, joined by White, Marshall, Blackmun, Stevens Dissent O'Connor, joined by Rehnquist, Kennedy | ||
South Carolina v. Gathers, 490 U.S. 805 (1989), was a United States Supreme Court case which held that testimony in the form of a victim impact statement is only admissible during the sentencing phase of a trial if it directly relates to the "circumstances of the crime". This case was later overruled by the Supreme Court decision in Payne v. Tennessee 501 U.S. 808 (1991).
Contents
Opinion of the Court
In a majority opinion by Justice Brennan, the Court held that Booth v. Maryland (1987) left open the possibility that the kind of information contained in victim impact statements could be admissible if it "relate[d] directly to the circumstances of the crime." Though South Carolina asserted that such is the case here, the Court disagreed, holding that the content of the cards at issue to be irrelevant to the "circumstances of the crime."
Justice O'Connor authored a dissenting opinion, joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justice Kennedy; Justice Scalia also dissented, expressly arguing that Booth v. Maryland should be overruled.
Aftermath
The impact of the case was somewhat short-lived, as two years later the Rehnquist Court decided Payne, which has since had a significant impact in victim's rights, criminology and the lives of the parties involved.