However, in 1976 the supreme court overturned its previous decision in Furman v. Georgia with a new case: Gregg v. Georgia. Troy Gregg was sentenced to death as he was convicted of robbing and murdering two men he was traveling with. Although accepting the robbery accusation he appealed to the supreme court that execution for murder was unconstitutional under the eighth amendment (Oyez). This directly conflicted with the already established case of Furman v. Georgia as the precedent stated that the death penalty was in fact unconstitutional. The problem with Furman v. Georgia case in regards to Gregg was that it answered a different question than the one Gregg raised himself. Gregg’s trial asked if the death penalty was constitutional in its entirety; Furman’s trial asked if it the death penalty was unconstitutional if the legal proceedings were unfair. …show more content…
In spite of this, it was decided that two of three conditions must be met before a capital sentence could be made in regards to murder: 1.) another capital crime was committed 2.) it was used to facilitate robbery 3.) the method was outrageously inhumane (Oyez). The Gregg v. Georgia case still pertains to modern society [2017] and has been the legal basis for other supreme court rulings such as Kennedy v. Louisiana and Tuilaepa v. California where it refined the criteria needed to be convicted and tried for the death penalty (Garvey). Advocates for capital punishment cite that these court cases to prove the legitimacy of their view point where the government not only recognizes their stance, but enforces it as