Payne V. Tennessee - Impact

Impact

Payne has had a significant, ongoing impact in victim's rights, criminology, the law, the Court itself, and the lives of the parties involved.

The case allowed victim impact statements in US courts, and the overwhelming majority of states now allow such use in the sentencing phase of trials. The whole area of victim's rights was boosted by this case. One scholar recently wrote:

Among the most significant products of the Victim's Rights Movement over the past decade has been the revival of the use of victim impact evidence—evidence relating to the victim's personal characteristics and the emotional impact of the crime on others--during capital sentencing. With its decision in Payne v. Tennessee (1991), the US Supreme Court not only reversed its own recent precedent holding such evidence to be unconstitutional, it left only a vague and malleable standard for limiting its admissibility. —Joel F. Donahue

Another scholar calls the verdict in Payne an example of "symbolic violence." It was pointed out that:

Rehnquist's reliance on this image of the perpetrator as a rabid animal that is foaming at the mouth helps to justify the violence of Payne's death sentence while it also obscures that violence. The majority opinion in Payne, like the prosecutor's arguments before the jury, hinges on contrasting little Nicholas to Pervis Payne, juxtaposing Nicholas's smallness and vulnerability to Payne's murderous and inhuman power. The smaller and more innocent the victim, the stronger and more guilty the defendant appears. —Jennifer K. Wood

The case was one in a line of cases that showed how the Rehnquist Court shifted to the conservative or "right" on criminal cases. The case is cited by at least one major college text book as a "capstone case."

Payne's execution was stayed in April 2007, and after protracted litigation, again scheduled in December 2007, and stayed again that month. Payne is still alive as of January 2010 and is on death row for the double homicide.