Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Institution
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Death And Texas: The Unevolved Model Of Decency, Patrick Metze
Death And Texas: The Unevolved Model Of Decency, Patrick Metze
Patrick Metze
Professor Metze takes a critical look at Texas‟s substantive capital murder statute, Texas Penal Code § 19.03, the current state of the law, the available constitutional history of each paragraph, the Texas Legislature's expansive growth of death eligible crimes, and the Court of Criminal Appeals' complicity in this development, arguing that the statute has become violative of due process as unconstitutionally vague in its application, returning Texas capital jurisprudence to its genesis, exposing virtually all that commit murder in Texas to a system that once again has become arbitrary, capricious, and discriminatory in its application to minorities and in particular …
There Must Be A Means: The Backward Jurisprudence Of Baze V. Rees, Nadia N. Sawicki
There Must Be A Means: The Backward Jurisprudence Of Baze V. Rees, Nadia N. Sawicki
Nadia N. Sawicki
The Supreme Court’s plurality opinion in Baze v. Rees begins with a seemingly simple assertion of constitutional law. “We begin with the principle, settled by Gregg, that capital punishment is constitutional.” It continues, “It necessarily follows that there must be a means of carrying it out.” This second pronouncement provides the foundation for the Supreme Court’s holding in Baze that Kentucky’s refusal to modify its lethal injection procedure does not violate the Eighth Amendment. However, in taking the position that the constitutionality of an existing method of capital punishment is dependent on the availability of alternative execution procedures, the Supreme …
The Facts About Ring V. Arizona And The Jury's Role In Capital Sentencing, Sam Kamin, Justin Marceau
The Facts About Ring V. Arizona And The Jury's Role In Capital Sentencing, Sam Kamin, Justin Marceau
Sam Kamin
When it was decided in 2002, Ring v. Arizona appeared to be a watershed in the way capital sentences are handed out in the United States: it overturned several states’ death penalty statutes and appeared to imperil many more. Ring announced that the rule of Apprendi v. New Jersey applied to capital sentencing and required that any fact necessary to the imposition of the death penalty be proven to a jury and beyond a reasonable doubt. Yet eight years after the case was decided, it is not clear what, if anything, Ring in fact demands of the states. Determining exactly …
Original Habeas Redux, Lee B. Kovarsky
Original Habeas Redux, Lee B. Kovarsky
Lee Kovarsky
In "Original Habeas Redux," I map the modern dimensions of the Supreme Court’s most exotic jurisdiction—the original habeas writ. The Court has not issued such relief since 1925 and, until recently, had not ordered a case transferred pursuant to that authority in over fifty years. In August 2009, by transferring a capital prisoner’s original habeas petition to a federal district court rather than dismissing it outright, In re Davis abruptly thrust this obscure power back into mainstream legal debate over both the death penalty and the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction. Scrambling to understand how the authority has evolved since its …
What's Messing With Texas Death Sentences?, David Mccord
What's Messing With Texas Death Sentences?, David Mccord
David McCord
This article empirically examines the decline in death sentences in Texas over about the last decade.
Death, Ineligibility And Habeas Corpus, Lee B. Kovarsky
Death, Ineligibility And Habeas Corpus, Lee B. Kovarsky
Lee Kovarsky
I examine the interaction between what I call 'death ineligibility' challenges and the habeas writ. A death ineligibility claim alleges that a criminally-confined capital prisoner belongs to a category of offenders for which the Eighth Amendment forbids execution. By contrast, a 'crime innocence' claim alleges that, colloquially speaking, a capital prisoner 'wasn’t there, and didn’t do it.' In the last eight years, the Supreme Court has identified several new ineligibility categories, including mentally retarded offenders. Configured primarily to address crime innocence and procedural challenges, however, modern habeas law is poorly equipped to accommodate ineligibility claims. Death Ineligibility traces the genesis …