In the case of Johnson v. Mississippi in 1987, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a death sentence based on prior convictions could not stand if one of those convictions was later overturned. The petitioner, Bobby Joe Johnson, had been sentenced to death for murder in Mississippi; his sentencing relied heavily on a previous conviction from New York which was subsequently reversed due to constitutional errors during trial proceedings. Despite this reversal, the Mississippi Supreme Court upheld Johnson's death sentence arguing that it would have imposed capital punishment even without considering the invalidated conviction as an aggravating circumstance. However, the U.S Supreme Court disagreed and held that reliance on an invalid prior conviction violated principles of fairness and integrity fundamental to American jurisprudence under Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishments.

In the dissenting opinion for Johnson v. Mississippi, Justice Thurgood Marshall argued that the majority's decision was a clear violation of due process rights. He contended that it was fundamentally unfair to allow a death sentence to stand when it had been significantly influenced by evidence later proven false - in this case, an overturned conviction from New York used as aggravating circumstance during sentencing. Marshall asserted that such circumstances required at least reconsideration of the penalty phase and possibly even retrial of the entire case. He also criticized the majority for failing to address whether or not Johnson’s counsel provided ineffective assistance during his trial, which could have further impacted his right to fair proceedings.