Digital Commons Network^™

International Human Rights, A "Foolproof" Death Penalty Act, And The Politics Of Capital Punishment, Russell G. Murphy

Suffolk University Law School Faculty Works

A majority of American states recognize the death penalty as a lawful and constitutional sentence for the most serious crimes committed by the most dangerous and blameworthy criminals. However, in recent years, numerous flaws in capital punishment systems have caused courts in the United States to reverse death sentences. Over one hundred death row inmates have been exonerated and released from prison. These same problems – racial bias, untrustworthy evidence, police and prosecutor misconduct, jury malfunctioning – have been joined with more philosophical notions of the limits of government and respect for human dignity to make capital punishment a human …

Steven M. Schneebaum On The Death Penalty And Human Rights. By Sir Fred Phillips. Q.C. Kingston, Jamaica: Caribbean Law Publishing Company. 2009. 101pp., Steven M. Schneebaum

Human Rights & Human Welfare

A review of:

The Death Penalty and Human Rights. By Sir Fred Phillips. Q.C. Kingston, Jamaica: Caribbean Law Publishing Company. 2009. 101pp.

Minority Practice, Majority's Burden: The Death Penalty Today, James S. Liebman, Peter Clarke

Faculty Scholarship

Although supported in principle by two-thirds of the public and even more of the States, capital punishment in the United States is a minority practice when the actual death-sentencing practices of the nation's 3000-plus counties and their populations are considered This feature of American capital punishment has been present for decades, has become more pronounced recently, and is especially clear when death sentences, which are merely infrequent, are distinguished from executions, which are exceedingly rare.

The first question this Article asks is what forces account for the death-proneness of a minority of American communities? The answer to that question – …

The Family Capital Of Capital Families: Investigating Empathic Connections Between Jurors And Defendants' Families In Death Penalty Cases, Jody L. Madeira

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court’S Rationale In Capital Cases: A One Way Street?, Kimberly Bliss

Pace Law Review

No abstract provided.

"Why Rebottle The Genie?": Capitalizing On Closure In Death Penalty Proceedings, Jody L. Madeira

Indiana Law Journal

Closure, though a term with great rhetorical force in the capital punishment context, has to date evaded systematic analysis, instead becoming embroiled in ideological controversy. For victims who have rubbed the rights lamp for years, inclusion in capital proceedings and accompanying closure opportunities are perceived as a force with the potential to grant wishes of peace and finality. Scholars, however, argue for rebottling the closure genie lest closure itself prove false or its pursuit violate a defendant's constitutional rights. In order to effectively appraise the relationship of closure to criminal jurisprudence, however, and thus to decide whether and to what …

The Impact Of Civilian Aggravating Factors On The Military Death Penalty (1984-2005): Another Chapter In The Resistance Of The Armed Forces To The Civilianization Of Military Justice, Catherine M. Grosso, David C. Baldus, George Woodworth

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In 1984, the U.S. Armed Forces amended its capital punishment system for death eligible murder to bring it into compliance with Furman v. Georgia. Those amendments were modeled after death penalty legislation prevailing in over thirty states. After a brief period between 1986 and 1990, the charging decisions of commanders and the conviction and sentencing decisions of court martial members (jurors) transformed the military death penalty system into a dual system that treats two classes of death eligible murder quite differently. Since 1990, a member of the armed forces accused of a killing a commissioned officer or murder with a …

Lethal Discrimination 2: Repairing The Remedies For Racial Discrimination In Capital Sentencing, J. Thomas Sullivan

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

When Lightning Strikes Back: South Carolina's Return To The Unconstitutional Standardless Capital Sentencing Regime Of The Pre-Furman Era, John H. Blume, Sheri Johnson, Emily C. Paavola, Keir M. Weyble

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Moral And Spiritual Challenge Of Capital Punishment, Lloyd Steffen

Sacred Heart University Review

Lloyd Steffen is University Chaplain and Professor of Religion Studies at Lehigh University. This talk was delivered at Sacred Heart University on March 15, 1999, as the annual Bishop Walter W. Curtis Lecture.

Statewide Capital Punishment: The Case For Eliminating Counties' Role In The Death Penalty, Adam M. Gershowitz

Vanderbilt Law Review

The State of Texas is known as the capital of capital punishment.' But is that reputation deserved? In a way, yes. Texas sends more people to death row than any other state, and it executes them far faster. However, in another way, it is incorrect to suggest that "the State" of Texas is a prolific user of capital punishment. Death penalty cases are prosecuted by counties, not the state, and a majority of Texas's counties have never imposed the death penalty. In fact, only a handful of Texas's 254 counties regularly seek the death penalty. Many other states have a …

Assembly's Final Report

CACTUS--Citizens' Assembly for Critical Thinking About the United States

Each CACTUS brings new excitement along with new challenges. CACTUS 2010 was exciting because it was larger than in past years, more freshmen enrolled than in previous years, and our topic “What should we do about the death penalty? Keep it? Change it? Abolish it?” was by far the most profound, with implications touching on topics such as social justice, safety, equality, religious and ethical arguments, the Bill of Rights, and federalism, to name just a few.

Why Did China Reform Its Death Penalty?, Kandis Scott

Faculty Publications

China recently reformed its death penalty laws, and as a result the government has executed fewer prisoners. The author explores possible reasons and policy concerns behind China's legal reform. These influences include international forces and domestic factors, such as the media, changed circumstances, compassion, and politics. Although hardly transparent, the underlying motivations for the revisions suggest that eventually China may abolish capital punishment, perhaps even before the United States does so.

Limiting Death: Maryland’S New Death Penalty Law, Michael Millemann

Maryland Law Review

In this Article, I describe and analyze the State of Maryland's 2009 death penalty law. This law adds three new death-eligibility criteria to the pre-existing law. These new evidentiary criteria supplement the pre-existing substantive death-eligibility criteria. As a result, Maryland now has one of the most restrictive death penalties in the country.

The Public Outrage Phenomenon & Limits On Remedying The Effect Of Implicit Racist Attitudes On Capital Charging Decisions, Peggy Nicholson

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Evaluating The Deterrent Effect Of Capital Punishment On Crime, Permiterio Leocadio

Dissertations and Theses

Many researchers, academics or philosophers see capital punishment as a deterrent to crime. Several states in the United States apply the death penalty to try to reduce crime. Other states do not agree with the application of this repressive law arguing that a crime should not be solved with another crime. From a theoretical view, the principal point of analysis about capital punishment in this present work is to state that capital punishment can reduce crime. Here also it will be examined some of the collateral consequences of the application of capital punishment, and its implications for the Criminal Justice …

Strategery's Refuge, Christopher W. Seeds

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

By popular account, the Supreme Court’s recent decisions on effective assistance of counsel in capital sentencing—aggressive critiques of counsel’s failure to investigate and present mitigating evidence—initiate an era of improved oversight of the quality of legal representation in death penalty cases. One would expect the new and improved jurisprudence to curb post hoc efforts by trial counsel to disguise incomplete trial preparation as a tactical decision, a practice that has long undercut the Strickland doctrine. But the shelters for post hoc rationalizations—the refuges for “strategery”—remain. Surveying decisions of the federal courts of appeals since the turn of the century, this …

Of Atkins And Men: Deviations From Clinical Definitions Of Mental Retardation In Death Penalty Cases, John H. Blume, Sheri Johnson, Christopher W. Seeds

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Under Atkins v. Virginia, the Eighth Amendment exempts from execution individuals who meet the clinical definitions of mental retardation set forth by the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities and the American Psychiatric Association. Both define mental retardation as significantly subaverage intellectual functioning accompanied by significant limitations in adaptive functioning, originating before the age of 18. Since Atkins, most jurisdictions have adopted definitions of mental retardation that conform to those definitions. But some states, looking often to stereotypes of persons with mental retardation, apply exclusion criteria that deviate from and are more restrictive than the accepted scientific and clinical …

Of Atkins And Men: Deviations From Clinical Definitions Of Mental Retardation In Death Penalty Cases, John H. Blume, Sheri Lynn Johnson, Christopher Seeds

Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy

Under Atkins v. Virginia, the Eighth Amendment exempts from execution individuals who meet the clinical definitions of mental retardation set forth by the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities and the American Psychiatric Association. Both define mental retardation as significantly subaverage intellectual functioning accompanied by significant limitations in adaptive functioning, originating before the age of 18. Since Atkins, most jurisdictions have adopted definitions of mental retardation that conform to those definitions. But some states, looking often to stereotypes of persons with mental retardation, apply exclusion criteria that deviate from and are more restrictive than the accepted scientific and clinical …

Mitigating Death, Emily Hughes

Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy

No abstract provided.

Victims, “Closure,” And The Sociology Of Emotion, Susan A. Bandes

Law and Contemporary Problems

Bandes discusses the polarizing function of victim impact statements used in the context of the death penalty. The use of victim impact statements is justified in order to promote closure for the victim, but it's unclear what psychological closure can be accomplished from the formal litigation process. Even if victim impact statements do help their authors, in the context of the death penalty the authors are family members of the victim, not the direct victim, and Bandes questions whether it's important to further their interests at the expense of the interests of the defendant. The only recourse for the jury …

An Empirical Look At Atkins V. Virginia And Its Application In Capital Cases, John H. Blume, Sheri Lynn Johnson, Christopher Seeds

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In Atkins vs. Virginia, the Supreme Court declared that evolving standards of decency and the Eighth Amendment prohibit the death penalty for individuals with intellectual disability (formerly, "mental retardation"). Both supporters and opponents of the categorical exemption, however, have criticized the Atkins opinion. The Atkins dissent, for example, urged that the decision would open the gates of litigation to a flood of frivolous claims. Another prominent criticism, heard from those more supportive of the Court's ruling, has been that the language the Court used communicating that states must "generally conform" to the clinical definitions of mental retardation is ambiguous enough …

Texas Law's Life Or Death Rule In Capital Sentencing: Scrutinizing Eight Amendment Violations And The Case Of Juan Guerrero, Jr., John Niland, Riddhi Dasgupta

St. Mary's Law Journal

The United States Supreme Court has never explained the Eighth Amendment’s impact in noncapital cases involving a mentally retarded or brain-injured defendant. The Court has not provided guidance to legislatures or lower courts concerning the acceptable balancing of aggravating and mitigating factors and the role that mitigating factors must play in the sentencing decision. A definitive gap exists between the protections afforded to a criminal defendant facing a life sentence as opposed to those confronted with the death penalty. The Court requires sentencing procedures to consider aggravating and mitigating factors, including mental retardation and brain damage, when imposing a death …

The Abolition Of The Death Penalty In New Jersey And Its Impact On Our Nation's "Evolving Standards Of Decency", Aaron Scherzer

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

In 2007, New Jersey became the first state in over forty years to abolish the death penalty legislatively. Twenty-five years earlier, in 1982, New Jersey had followed a state-level trend by reinstating its death penalty. However, during the twenty-five years between reinstatement and abolition, New Jersey did not conduct a single execution. Instead, the New Jersey Supreme Court reversed numerous death penalty cases and consistently narrowed the class of cases eligible for the death penalty. This Note posits that the supreme court's narrowing of eligible cases was one of the factors that prevented executions from taking place in New Jersey. …

Choosing Those Who Will Die: The Effect Of Race, Gender, And Law In Prosecutorial Decision To Seek The Death Penalty In Durham County, North Carolina, Isaac Unah

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

District prosecutors in the United States exercise virtually unfettered power and discretion to decide which murder cases to prosecute for capital punishment. According to neoclassical theory of formal legal rationality, the process for determining criminal punishment should be based upon legal rules established and sanctioned by the state to communicate the priorities of the political community. The theory therefore argues in favor of a determinate mode of decision-making that diminishes the importance of extrinsic elements such as race and gender in the application of law. In the empirical research herein reported, I test this theory using death eligible cases in …

Pleading Guilty For Life : An Exploration Of Plea Bargaining In The Face Of Death, Susan Ehrhard

Legacy Theses & Dissertations (2009 - 2024)

This dissertation explores decision making and the process of plea bargaining in aggravated murder cases. The study focuses on the extent to which, if any, the death penalty acts as a bargaining tool, inducing guilty pleas to sentences that would otherwise not be accepted, were the death penalty upon conviction at trial not a possibility. The role of the death penalty in this process is an important consideration and one that raises significant implications concerning the human and financial costs of capital punishment. Interviews with prosecutors and defense attorneys in a state where the maximum punishment for murder is death …

The Deterrent Effect Of Death Penalty Eligibility: Evidence From The Adoption Of Child Murder Eligibility Factors, Michael D. Frakes, Matthew Harding

Faculty Scholarship

We draw on within-state variations in the reach of capital punishment statutes between 1977 and 2004 to identify the deterrent effects associated with capital eligibility. Focusing on the most prevalent eligibility expansion, we estimate that the adoption of a child murder factor is associated with an approximately 20% reduction in the homicide rate of youth victims. Eligibility expansions may enhance deterrence by (1) paving the way for more executions and (2) providing prosecutors with greater leverage to secure enhanced non-capital sentences. While executions themselves are rare, this latter channel is likely to be triggered fairly regularly, providing a reasonable basis …

Performing Discretion Or Performing Discrimination: Race, Ritual, And Peremptory Challenges In Capital Jury Selection, Melynda J. Price

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

Research shows the mere presence of Blacks on capital juries-- on the rare occasions they are seated--can mean the difference between life and death. Peremptory challenges are the primary method to remove these pivotal participants. Batson v. Kentucky developed hearings as an immediate remedy for the unconstitutional removal of jurors through racially motivated peremptory challenges. These proceedings have become rituals that sanction continued bias in the jury selection process and ultimately affect the outcome of capital trials. This Article deconstructs the role of the Batson ritual in legitimating the removal of African American jurors. These perfunctory hearings fail to meaningfully …

Crime Labs And Prison Guards: A Comment On Melendez-Diaz And Its Potential Impact On Capital Sentencing Proceedings, John H. Blume, Emily C. Paavola

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees a criminal defendant the right "to be confronted with the witnesses against him." Four years ago, in Crawford v. Washington, the United States Supreme Court held that this right bars the admission of testimonial hearsay statements against criminal defendants, regardless of whether or not the statements fall within an evidentiary hearsay exception. It was a decision that other courts later described as a "bombshell," a "renaissance," and "a newly shaped lens" through which to view the Confrontation Clause. The case generated an extensive amount of discussion among legal commentators.

Since its …

The Afterlife Of Ford And Panetti: Execution Competence And The Capacity To Assist Counsel, Christopher W. Seeds

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The capacity to assist counsel and communicate a defense once held a central place in assessing competence for execution. Since Ford v. Wainwright (1986), however, courts have discarded this measure, viewing Justice Powell’s concurring opinion, which required only that a prisoner understand the execution as mortal punishment for a capital crime, as the Eighth Amendment rule. In a significant development, the Supreme Court’s decision in Panetti v. Quarterman (2007) - its first interpreting Ford - sends notice that Justice Powell’s statements on the substantive standard are not Ford's rule, providing a long overdue opportunity to address whether executing prisoners with …