Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Law
History Repeats Itself: The Post-Furman Return To Arbitrariness In Capital Punishment, Lindsey S. Vann
History Repeats Itself: The Post-Furman Return To Arbitrariness In Capital Punishment, Lindsey S. Vann
Law Student Publications
Part I of this comment provides a brief review of Furman and the circumstances leading to the decision. Part II discusses the factors indicating current arbitrariness and other recurring fac-tors surrounding the American death penalty. Part III examines the development of the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause since Furman. Finally, Part IV discusses how the Supreme Court should apply its contemporary Eighth Amendment doctrine to the current circumstances surrounding the imposition of the death penalty.
Death In The Federal Courts: Expectations And Realities Of The Federal Death Penalty Act Of 1994, John P. Cunningham
Death In The Federal Courts: Expectations And Realities Of The Federal Death Penalty Act Of 1994, John P. Cunningham
University of Richmond Law Review
"Thou shalt not kill." These four words have echoed throughout the churches, judicial courts, and political meeting places of men and women for time immemorial. Along with their deep religious and political significance, they carry with them a haunting contrast to the current state of mankind: men and women can kill other men and women-legally. In the United States, this "legal" killing, commonly referred to as the "death penalty," traditionally takes place within the confines of the individual state judicial systems, and generally involves the execution of felons tried and convicted of some form of intentional murder.
The Role Of Executive Clemency In Modern Death Penalty Cases, Bruce Ledewitz, Scott Staples
The Role Of Executive Clemency In Modern Death Penalty Cases, Bruce Ledewitz, Scott Staples
University of Richmond Law Review
When a governor commutes a sentence of death, typically to one of life imprisonment either with an extended mandatory term or without possibility of parole, how is this action to be understood? As former Governor Pat Brown's book about his commutation decisions illustrates, in a period of widespread support for the death penalty, each commutation contains an appeal for popular support and understanding as to why the decision was made. Where the case for commutation cannot be made to the public's satisfaction, a governor is not likely to act.
Executive Clemency In Post-Furman Capital Cases, Michael L. Radelet, Barbara A. Zsembik
Executive Clemency In Post-Furman Capital Cases, Michael L. Radelet, Barbara A. Zsembik
University of Richmond Law Review
In the 1972 case of Furman v. Georgia, the United States Supreme Court invalidated virtually all existing death penalty statutes in the United States. Consequently, those jurisdictions that wanted to continue to execute were forced to revise their capital sentencing procedures. Since Furman,nearly all aspects of American death penalty law have been rewritten. Left unchanged by both the courts and the legislatures, however, are the ways in which states decide which death-sentenced inmates will have their sentences commuted through the powers of executive clemency.
The Quality Of Mercy: Race And Clemency In Florida Death Penalty Cases, 1924-1966, Margaret Vandiver
The Quality Of Mercy: Race And Clemency In Florida Death Penalty Cases, 1924-1966, Margaret Vandiver
University of Richmond Law Review
The scholarly literature on capital punishment includes few empirical studies of executive clemency. Commutations in capital cases have been rare since 1972 when the current era of capital punishment began with the United States Supreme Court's ruling in Furman v. Georgia. A large proportion of pre-1972 death sentences were commuted; examination of clemency decisions in those cases promises to reveal much about the history of capital punishment in the United States. The present study attempts to identify factors which influenced decisions to grant commutations of Florida death sentences pre-Furman, focusing particularly on whether the race of defendants and victims influenced …
Questions Surrounding Virginia's Death Penalty, James T. Lloyd Jr.
Questions Surrounding Virginia's Death Penalty, James T. Lloyd Jr.
University of Richmond Law Review
On August 10, 1982, Frank J. Coppola died in Virginia's electric chair. His was the fifth execution since the 1976 Supreme Court decision holding that a punishment of death was not unconstitutional per se. In the Commonwealth of Virginia, Coppola's was the first execution in over a decade.
Capital Punishment: Constitutional Parameters For The Ultimate Penalty, James F. Stutts
Capital Punishment: Constitutional Parameters For The Ultimate Penalty, James F. Stutts
University of Richmond Law Review
Four years after Furmanv. Georgia, the Supreme Court has resolved the major question left unanswered by that decision - does capital punishment per se constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the eighth amendment? The Court also announced the statutory standards which satisfy Furman's requirement that the death penalty not be imposed arbitrarily or capriciously. By a 7-2 vote, the Court held that the imposition of the death penalty for murder did not per se constitute cruel and unusual punishment. By the same vote, the Court upheld the capital sentencing statutes of Georgia, Florida and Texas, noting that arbitrary …
Proposed Legislation- Criminal Law-Proposed Revisions Of Title 18.1- Designation Of Punishment And Capital Punishment (Senate Bill No. 56)
University of Richmond Law Review
The Virginia General Assembly, during a Special Session in 1971, directed the Virginia Code Commission to revise Title 18.1, Crimes and Offenses Generally, of the Code of Virginia. Senate Bill No. 562 was adopted in essentially the same form as the Code Commission's revisions, however, due to the lack of time, the bill was carried over until the next session. This article will analyze several areas contained in Senate Bill No. 56: Designation of Punishment and Capital Punishment.
Revision Of Virginia's Criminal Code
Revision Of Virginia's Criminal Code
University of Richmond Law Review
On October 1, 1975 the criminal justice system of the Commonwealth of Virginia began to operate under revised codes of criminal law and procedure. Enacted during the last legislative session, Titles 18.2 and 19.2 contain an impressive array of new laws with which judges, lawyers, and law enforcement officers should quickly become familiar. In many instances, these new laws go far beyond recodification of existing laws. Several represent substantive changes which are quite controversial and remain hotly debated since the close of the legislative session.