Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Bucklew V. Precythe'S Return To The Original Meaning Of "Unusual": Prohibiting Extensive Delays On Death Row, Jacob Leon
Bucklew V. Precythe'S Return To The Original Meaning Of "Unusual": Prohibiting Extensive Delays On Death Row, Jacob Leon
Cleveland State Law Review
The Supreme Court, in Bucklew v. Precythe, provided an originalist interpretation of the term “unusual” in the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution. This originalist interpretation asserted that the word “unusual” proscribes punishments that have “long fallen out of use.” To support its interpretation, the Supreme Court cited John Stinneford’s well-known law review article The Original Meaning of “Unusual”: The Eighth Amendment as a Bar to Cruel Innovation. This Article, as Bucklew did, accepts Stinneford’s interpretation of the word “unusual” as correct. Under Stinneford’s interpretation, the term “unusual” is a legal term of art derived from eighteenth-century …
Ford V. Wainwright, Statutory Changes And A New Test For Sanity: You Can't Execute Me, I'M Crazy, Steven J. Huff
Ford V. Wainwright, Statutory Changes And A New Test For Sanity: You Can't Execute Me, I'M Crazy, Steven J. Huff
Cleveland State Law Review
In Ford v. Wainwright, the Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether the Eighth Amendment prohibits the execution of an insane inmate. In answering this query, the Court created a constitutional right not to be executed while incompetent. However, the Ford decision is not only important for its creation of a "new" constitutional right, it also has the potential of nullifying several state statutes in regards to the due process requirements of hearings addressing the issue of insanity at the time of execution. The Ford decision also requires that a new test of sanity be created the test of whether …
The Eighth Amendment And Capital Punishment Of Juveniles, Victor L. Streib
The Eighth Amendment And Capital Punishment Of Juveniles, Victor L. Streib
Cleveland State Law Review
The practice of imposing the death penalty for crimes committed while under the age of eighteen has occurred sporadically but persistently throughout American history. It gives every indication of continuing in this mode under current law and practice. Greatly differing approaches are followed by the various states as to the authorization and imposition of capital punishment for juveniles. This article explores the existence of a constitutionally-mandated minimum age below which the states may not venture in carrying out this practice. If such a nationwide minimum age exists or should exist, its justification can be found in current interpretations of the …