Tison vs. Arizona: Summary of Defense

Tison v. Arizona – Defense In this case, the felony-murder law is unconstitutional and Tisons cannot be executed because if they did not plan to or actually kill anyone, under the 8th Amendment, their punishment given is cruel and unusual. In Enmund v. Florida, Earl Enmund was given the death sentence for being an accessory to two murders. He later appealed and the Supreme Court ruled it was unlawful and his death sentence was vacated. The defendant’s punishment must be proportionate to the crimes they have committed and those not actually performing the murders should not be given the death sentence. We want consistency in the Supreme Court and giving the death penalty for Ricky and Raymond Tison should be uplifted because it would just not be a reasonable punishment. The 14th Amendment states, “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”. In the Enmund case, Earl Enmund was not given the death sentence because he did not commit any murder. It is only fair, under these circumstances, that the Tison brothers shouldn’t be given the death sentence either because they did not commit any murders. Our defendants were accessories to the murders, they aided and embedded their father and his friend, they were involved in armed robbery, kidnapping, and car theft but due to the fact that there is no evidence that the defendants intended to, attempted to, or in fact kill anyone, they do not deserve the death penalty under these conditions. We want to honor the 8th and 14th Amendment and keep uniformity in this country and that is why these two men should not receive the death sentence. There is no question these two brothers should be punished and that is why a life sentence without possibility of parole is a more