In Furman V. Georgia, 408 US 238, 92 S. Ct. 2726, 33 L. Ed.2d. 346, (1972) the question brought before the Supreme Court was: “The death penalty, as administered at the time, violated the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution.” The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case and certiorari was granted but limited to the following issue. “Does the imposition and execution of the death penalty in these three cases constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments?” Furman, a black man, 26, confessed that he did not know he had shot or killed the homeowner; all he was trying to do was escape from the house he decided to burgle and didn't know anyone was dead until he was picked up by the police. Georgia state law at the time made Furman eligible for the death penalty because the shooting occurred during the commission of a crime. The jury took less than two hours to find him guilty of murder, as well as sentencing Furman to death. Overturning the Georgia Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held, “. . . the imposition and execution of the death penalty in these cases constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.” Writing for the majority, Justice William O. Douglas stated: “In a nation committed to the equal protection of the laws there is no permissible “caste” aspect to the application of the law. Yet we know that the discretion of judges and juries in imposing the death penalty allows the punishment to be applied selectively. . .” Douglas believed that juries lacked the necessary guidance and arbitrarily applied the death penalty to target certain populations, acting half-baked or as a specific or general deterrent, while avoiding gratuitous infliction of suffering. In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Georgia's new death penalty law was not unconstitutional and that Georgia's law was both "judicious" and "carefully written." Writing for the majority, Justice Potter Stewart stated that “the statutory system under which Gregg was sentenced to death does not violate the Constitution.” Only Justices Brennan and Marshall dissented from this opinion. Justice Brennan reaffirmed his opinions in Furman v. Georgia. Justice Marshall also reaffirmed his opinions at the time of Furman v. Georgia, and goes on to state that: “. . .the suppression of life "because the transgressor deserves it" must certainly fall, since this punishment has at its basis the total denial of the dignity and value of the transgressor.”