Payne V. Tennessee - Issues and Holding

Issues and Holding

The main issue in the case was whether, as the Court had previously held, damaging testimony in the form of a victim impact questioning could be admissible in the sentencing phase of an otherwise fair state trial.

The defendant's guilt or innocence was not in issue at this hearing, as only the legal issues of admissibility of evidence, the victims' rights, and stare decisis were to be decided. The Court legally presumed that Payne was, in fact, guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, which was, in any case, not on appeal in that instance.

The court held that testimony on the form of a victim impact statement was admissible and constitutional in death penalty cases, thus expressly overruling two of that courts' precedents: Booth v. Maryland (1987) and South Carolina v. Gathers (1989).