Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
Atkins V. Virginia: National Consensus Or Six-Person Opinion?, Joanna Hall
Atkins V. Virginia: National Consensus Or Six-Person Opinion?, Joanna Hall
American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law
No abstract provided.
Killing Them With Procedure: A New Cruel And Unusual Punishment?, Jeremy J. Schirra
Killing Them With Procedure: A New Cruel And Unusual Punishment?, Jeremy J. Schirra
American University Criminal Law Brief
No abstract provided.
Contemplating Cruel And Unusual: A Critical Analysis Of Baze V. Rees In The Context Of The Supreme Court's Eighth Amendment Proportionality Jurisprudence, Katie Roth Heilman
Contemplating Cruel And Unusual: A Critical Analysis Of Baze V. Rees In The Context Of The Supreme Court's Eighth Amendment Proportionality Jurisprudence, Katie Roth Heilman
American University Law Review
This Comment argues that, while the Court’s modern Eighth Amendment jurisprudence has gradually reduced the circumstances under which the death penalty may be imposed, this trend is inconsistent with the Court’s unwillingness to critically examine the specific procedures states use to execute, even in the face of growing concerns over the humaneness of such procedures. Part I gives a historic overview of the Court’s limited method-of-execution jurisprudence, followed by a review of the Court’s recent line of rulings on challenges to the death penalty’s proportionality. Part II analyzes Baze within the broader context of the Court’s Eight Amendment proportionality jurisprudence. …
Cruelty To The Mentally Ill: An Eighth Amendment Challenge To The Abolition Of The Insanity Defense, Stephen M. Leblanc
Cruelty To The Mentally Ill: An Eighth Amendment Challenge To The Abolition Of The Insanity Defense, Stephen M. Leblanc
American University Law Review
This Comment addresses the present gap in insanity-defense laws
created by the defense’s abolition and offers an Eighth Amendment
based remedy. Part I reviews the history and evolution of the insanity
defense in Anglo-American law. It then describes how four states
have statutorily abolished the defense. It concludes with a discussion
of Clark v. Arizona, the Court’s most recent decision on the
constitutionality of the insanity defense. Part II turns to the Eighth
Amendment, examining its historical understanding and the
contemporary evolving-standards-of-decency analysis, through which
the Court assesses the constitutionality of modern-day punishments.
Part II concludes with a discussion of …
Narrowing Racial Disparities In Sentencing Through A System Of Mandatory Downward Departures, Douglas Smith
Narrowing Racial Disparities In Sentencing Through A System Of Mandatory Downward Departures, Douglas Smith
The Modern American
No abstract provided.
Managed Health Care In Prisons As Cruel And Unusual Punishment, Ira Robbins
Managed Health Care In Prisons As Cruel And Unusual Punishment, Ira Robbins
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
INTRODUCTION:Billy Roberts, a prisoner in an Alabama state prison, had a history of severe psychiatric disorders. He was often put on suicide watch, and received large doses of psychotropic drugs. A managed health care company, Correctional Medical Services (CMS), was responsible for the health care at the prison. After Roberts had a suicidal episode, CMS's statewide mental health care director reportedly put Roberts in an isolation cell rather than a psychiatric care unit. The mental health care director also ordered that Roberts' medication be discontinued pursuant to an alleged policy of CMS to get as many prisoners off psycho- tropic …
Punitive Conditions Of Prison Confinement: An Analysis Of Pugh V. Locke And Federal Court Supervision Of State Penal Administration Under The Eighth Amendment, Ira Robbins
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
The 1960's marked a watershed for the criminal justice system. In such areas as search and seizure, right to counsel and the privilege against self-incrimination, the federal courts first defined substantive constitutional rights and then imposed them upon disinclined functionaries at the state level. At first, these innovations raised thorny questions of constitutional interpretation about the rights involved, but, as is especially visible in the search and seizure area, the debate more recently has focused on the remedy chosen by the Supreme Court for enforcing these rights against the states.' This pattern of escalating federal involvement in the criminal justice …