Courtesy of the Chico Homeless Union

CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT

Understanding the importance of “and”

Does the word and have any significance? Does “cruel and unusual punish￾ents” have a different meaning from “cruel or unusual punishments”? The 

answer is yes. On this basis, the three strikes laws have been upheld: laws 

that allow courts to impose an extra-long jail sentence on anyone convicted 

of three felonies. This type of punishment sure was unusual, but it was held 

not to be cruel.

However, some three-strike cases make for worrying reading, like the 2003 

California case Lockyer v. Andrade. The theft of five videotapes was classified 

as a felony and, because the offender had a few prior convictions, he was 

sentenced to jail for 50 years to life. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that this 

sentence did not amount to cruel and unusual punishment.

Identifying some completely forbidden punishments

Here are some punishments that are completely forbidden:

✔️Torture: This term presumably includes the use of those old-time favorites, the pillory, the rack, the stocks, and cutting off ears and limbs. The 

exact meaning of the prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments has been debated since the days of the Framers. In 1789, Representative Samuel Livermore said, “It is sometimes necessary to hang a man, villains often deserve whipping, and perhaps having their ears cut off; but are we in the future to be prevented from inflicting these punishments 

because they are cruel?” The answer was yes. In 1878, the U.S. Supreme Court in Wilkerson v. Utah ruled that all punishments “of unnecessary 

cruelty” were forbidden by the Eighth Amendment.

26_587801-ch18.indd 259 4

✔️Canceling the citizenship of a U.S. citizen:

Albert Trop, a native-born .S. citizen, escaped from an army stockade while serving in the U.S. 

Army in World War II. He was court-martialed, sentenced to three years at hard labor, and received a dishonorable discharge. Later, Trop applied for a passport and was denied on the grounds that 

his army desertion had stripped him of U.S. citizenship. In 1958, the U.S. Supreme Court branded this refusal “cruel and unusual punishment.” 

Chief Justice Earl Warren, writing for the majority, held that “denationalization”is “the total destruction of the individual’s status is society.” 

Pointing out that desertion from the army can be punishable by death, 

Justice Felix Frankfurter hit back in his dissent: Can it “be seriously urged the loss of their citizenship is a fate worse than death?”

✔️Punishing someone for suffering from an illness:

Drug addiction, for example, drug addiction is an illness and should not be criminalized; the Supreme Court said so in Robinson v. California in 1962. But this decision put the court on a slippery slope as the1968 case of Powell v. Texas illustrates. In that case the majority of m the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that criminalizing public drunkenness did not amount to cruel and unusual punishment. Where to draw the line? Justice Abe Fortas suggested this test: “criminal penalties may not be inflicted upon a person for being in a condition he is powerless to change.” On this basis, Fortas dissented in favor of the drunk in Powell. But is an alcoholic really powerless to change his condition? Alcoholics Anonymous might dissent from Abe Fortas!

✔️Punishments that are cruel and unusual because they’re excessive:

Can a punishment be held to be cruel and unusual purely because it is regarded as excessive? 

Yes. This doctrine was first adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court back in 1910. In Coker v. Georgia, heard in 1977, the court held that the death penalty for the rape of an adult female was excessive and amounted to cruel and unusual punishment.

______________________________________________

THE FIRST AMENDMENT IS AS WRITTEN:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or

prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,

or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to

petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

THIS IS YOUR DAILY KNOW YOUR RIGHTS FACT BROUGHT TO YOU BY THE CHICO HOMELESS UNION!

_____________________________________

Know Your Rights!

Brought to you by the Chico Homeless Union

Sixth Amendment

The Sixth Amendment guarantees a fair trial to defendants in a criminal prosecution, including the right to a jury trial and the assistance of

Counsel.

 ✓ The Seventh Amendment guarantees the right to trial by jury in civil

Trials.

 ✓ The Eighth Amendment is best known for banning “cruel and unusual

Punishments.”

DEFENDENTS RIGHTS AT CRIMINAL PROSECUTION

✓ The right to a speedy trial

 ✓ The right to a public trial

 ✓ The right to a trial by an impartial jury from the district where the crime

Was committed

 ✓ The right to be informed of the nature of the accusation

 ✓ The right to be informed of the cause of the accusation

 ✓ The right to be confronted with the witnesses against him

 ✓ The right to compel the attendance of witnesses in his favor

 ✓ The right to be represented by counsel

______________________________________

Can you Panhandle?

Essentially yes you can as long as you follow a few rules and things not to do.

Your right to Panhandle is protected under the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution. You may ask people for money as long as you are not Aggressive. Aggressive Panhandling includes:

• Coming within 3ft of someone who has not agreed to give you money.
• Blocking a pedestrian or vehicle with your body.
• Following a person who has not agreed to give you money.
• Touching a person that has not agreed to give you money.
• Using violent or threatening gestures before or after someone gives you money.
• Using profane language before or after someone gives you money.
• Asking people for money with another person or group of people
• Asking someone for money while under the influence of drugs and or alcohol.