In Tison v. Arizona (1986), the United States Supreme Court upheld the death sentences of Ricky and Raymond Tison, who were convicted for their roles in a prison break that resulted in four murders. The brothers had not directly committed the killings but were found guilty under Arizona's felony murder statute, which allows accomplices to be sentenced as if they were principal actors. The court ruled 5-4 that imposing capital punishment on major participants in felonies involving lethal force - even those who did not actually kill anyone - does not violate the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishments. This decision clarified an earlier ruling (Enmund v Florida) where it was held that death penalty is disproportionate for minor participation without intent to kill or lethal force.

In the dissenting opinion for Tison v. Arizona, Justice Brennan, joined by Justice Marshall, argued that the death penalty should not be applied to defendants who did not themselves kill or intend to kill. They contended that the majority's decision blurred the line between major participation in a felony and minor participation - a distinction crucial in capital sentencing jurisprudence. The dissenters believed this could lead to arbitrary imposition of death sentences on less culpable offenders which would violate Eighth Amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishment. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of precedent cases like Enmund v Florida (1982), arguing instead these cases established clear constitutional limits on imposing capital punishment where there is no intent to kill.