Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
A Modest Proposal: The Federal Government Should Use Firing Squads To Execute Federal Death Row Inmates, Stephanie Moran
A Modest Proposal: The Federal Government Should Use Firing Squads To Execute Federal Death Row Inmates, Stephanie Moran
University of Miami Law Review
The Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment in the criminal justice system. As the federal government looks to reinstate the death penalty, this Note argues that it should include firing squad as an option for carrying out executions. While firing squads may shock the senses, this Note argues that they are in fact the only way to comport with the requirements of the Eighth Amendment.
The American Death Penalty: Constitutional Regulation As The Distinctive Feature Of American Exceptionalism, Jordan M. Steiker
The American Death Penalty: Constitutional Regulation As The Distinctive Feature Of American Exceptionalism, Jordan M. Steiker
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
Five Under The Eighth: Methodology Review And The Cruel And Unusual Punishments Clause, Kristina E. Beard
Five Under The Eighth: Methodology Review And The Cruel And Unusual Punishments Clause, Kristina E. Beard
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
Innocence Of Death: A Habeas Petitioner's Last Chance, Deborah J. Gander
Innocence Of Death: A Habeas Petitioner's Last Chance, Deborah J. Gander
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
Sentencing A Defendant To Death: Procedural Review Of The Use Of Testimony From Compelled Psychiatric Examinations, Lori Ann Weiner
Sentencing A Defendant To Death: Procedural Review Of The Use Of Testimony From Compelled Psychiatric Examinations, Lori Ann Weiner
University of Miami Law Review
In this casenote, the author critically examines the recent decision of Smith v. Estelle, in which the Fifth Circuit used a dual rationale for vacating a death sentence. The court held that Texas violated the defendant's due process rights by producing a surprise psychiatric witness at sentencing. The court held also that the defendant had a fifth amendment right to refuse a court-compelled psychiatric examination because he had not waived that right by raising an insanity defense. Discussing this decision in the context of the constitutionality of death sentencing procedures, the author argues that the Supreme Court should uphold …