State of Tennessee v. James P. Stout
This text of State of Tennessee v. James P. Stout (State of Tennessee v. James P. Stout) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Tennessee Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON November 15, 2000 Session
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JAMES P. STOUT
Automatic Appeal from the Court of Criminal Appeals Criminal Court for Shelby County Nos. 96-08227, 96-08228, 96-08229 Joseph B. Dailey, Judge
No. M1998-00079-SC-DDT-DD - Filed May 24, 2001
ADOLPHO A. BIRCH, JR., J., concurring and dissenting.
Although I agree with the majority’s decision to uphold the conviction in this case, I write separately to emphasize my continued dissatisfaction with Tennessee’s comparative proportionality review protocol. Beginning with my dissent in State v. Chalmers, I have repeatedly called for reform of the protocol. 28 S.W.3d 913, 923-25 (Tenn. 2000) (Birch, J., concurring and dissenting); see also, e.g., State v. Carruthers, 35 S.W.3d 516, 581 (Tenn. 2000) (Birch, J., concurring and dissenting); State v. Keen, 31 S.W.3d 196, 234 (Tenn. 2000) (Birch, J., concurring and dissenting). Our current protocol, in my view, has three shortcomings: “the ‘test’ we employ [for comparative proportionality review] is so broad that nearly any sentence could be found proportionate; our review procedures are too subjective; and the ‘pool’ of cases which are reviewed for proportionality is too small.” Chalmers, 28 S.W.3d at 923 (Birch, J., concurring and dissenting). Unless these shortcomings are remedied, this Court cannot provide genuine assurance that disproportionate sentences of death will be set aside.
“I am unwilling to approve of results reached through the use of a procedure with which I cannot agree,”1 and to date, the flaws I perceive in our comparative proportionality review protocol have not been cured. Therefore, I dissent, respectfully, from the Court’s decision to impose the death penalty in this case.
___________________________________ ADOLPHO A. BIRCH, JR., JUSTICE
1 See Coe v. S tate, 17 S.W.3d 193, 248 -49 (Tenn. 2000) (Birch, J., dissenting).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
State of Tennessee v. James P. Stout, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-of-tennessee-v-james-p-stout-tenn-2000.