Which case clarified procedures for a death penalty to avoid cruel and unusual punishment?

• A. Furman v. Georgia (1972)
• B. Gregg v. Georgia (1976)
• C. Barron v. Baltimore (1833)
• D. Katz v. United States (1967)

Answer: (B)

Gregg v. Georgia explains how the death penalty can be applied without violating the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment by requiring specific procedural safeguards. After Furman v. Georgia showed that capital punishment could be imposed in an arbitrary and inconsistent way, Gregg upheld the death penalty only when states adopted revised procedures designed to prevent that arbitrariness. The ruling endorsed a two-stage, bifurcated trial process: first the guilt phase, then a separate sentencing phase where judges or juries consider aggravating and mitigating circumstances. It also emphasized the need for guided discretion and automatic appellate review to ensure proportional, individualized sentencing. This decision thus clarifies that the death penalty itself isn’t unconstitutional, but it must be carried out under procedures that curb arbitrariness and provide thorough review. The other cases don’t address these procedural safeguards for capital punishment: Barron v. Baltimore deals with incorporation of rights against states, Katz v. United States concerns privacy and the Fourth Amendment, and Furman v. Georgia, while identifying the problem of arbitrariness, does not provide the post-arrest framework Gregg establishes.