Law Commons^™

Commentary On Counsel's Duty To Seek And Negotiate A Disposition In Capital Cases (Aba Guideline 10.9.1), Russell Stetler

Hofstra Law Review

This paper discusses counsel's duty to seek to resolve death penalty cases through negotiated dispositions for a sentence less than death.

Nothing Less Than The Dignity Of Man: Evolving Standards, Botched Executions And Utah's Controversial Use Of The Firing Squad , Christopher Q. Cutler

Cleveland State Law Review

While outrage boils to the surface when Utah uses its firing squad option, there is little substantive legal development concerning the firing squad's use. Few cases have challenged the firing squad's constitutionality. This article discusses the legal and political implications of the firing squad. Using the Supreme Court's everdeveloping Eighth Amendment jurisprudence as a guide, this article discusses whether the firing squad, both historically and in its present application, passes constitutional muster. Beyond those factors that trigger constitutional protection, this article discusses those elements of the firing squad's use which define society's humanity and demonstrate our dignity. In the end, …

Constitutional Law: Retarded Justice: The Supreme Court's Subjective Standards For Capital Punishment Of The Mentally Retarded, Daniel Nickel

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Death Penalty And Adversarial Justice In The United States, Samuel R. Gross

Book Chapters

In a volume devoted to comparing adversarial and inquisitorial procedures in Western countries, the subject of the death penalty is an anomaly. Any system of adjudication must address several basic tasks: how to obtain information from parties and witnesses, how to evaluate that information, how to utilize expert knowledge, how to act in the face of uncertainty, how to review and reconsider decisions. By comparing how competing systems deal with these tasks we can hope to learn something about the strengths and weaknesses of alternative approaches to common problems. The death penalty, however, is not an essential function of a …

Atkins, Adolescence, And The Maturity Heuristic: Rationales For A Categorical Exemption For Juveniles From Capital Punishment, Jeffrey A. Fagan

Faculty Scholarship

In Atkins v. Virginia, the U.S. Supreme Court voted six to three to bar further use of the death penalty for mentally retarded offenders. The Court offered three reasons for banning the execution of the retarded. First, citing a shift in public opinion over the thirteen years since Penry v. Lynaugh, the Court in Atkins ruled that the execution of the mentally retarded is "cruel and unusual punishment" prohibited by the Eighth Amendment. Second, the Court concluded that retaining the death penalty for the mentally retarded would not serve the interest in retribution or deterrence that is essential to capital …

Roots "Resolving The Death Penalty: Wisdom From The Ancients", Robert Blecker

Articles & Chapters

Lest it be cruel and unusual, the U.S. Supreme Court has held, capital punishment must be consistent with the evolving standards of decency of a maturing society. Although controversy swirls around our current sense of decency, this Society's changing standards are largely the product of deeply embedded traditions and an unchanging cultural core. Thus, virtually every heated death penalty debate today requires us not only to take the temperature of the people, but also to appreciate their temperament.

ROOTS: Resolving the Death Penalty: Wisdom from the Ancients reflects the current controversy back onto the core of Western Culture - the …

What They Say At The End: Capital Victims' Families And The Press, Samuel R. Gross, Daniel J. Matheson

Articles

Perhaps the most common complaint by American crime victims and their families is that they are ignored-by the police, by the prosecutors, by the courts and by the press. However true that may be for capital cases in general, there is at least one consistent exception: the great majority of newspaper accounts of executions include at least some description of the reactions of the victims' families and of any surviving victims. It seems to have become an item on the checklist, part of the "who, what, where, when, why, and how" of execution stories. When no family members are available, …

Rethinking The Death Penalty: Can We Define Who Deserves Death – A Symposium Held At The Association Of The Bar Of The City Of New York May 22, 2002, Martin J. Leahy, Norman L. Greene, Robert Blecker, Jeffrey L. Kirchmeier, William M. Erlbaum, David Von Drehle, Jeffrey A. Fagan

Faculty Scholarship

In light of the defects of the capital punishment system and recent calls for a moratorium on executions, many are calling for serious reform of the system. Even some who would not eliminate the death penalty entirely propose reforms that they contend would result in fewer executions and would limit the death penalty to a category that they call the "worst of the worst." This program asks the question: Is there a category of defendants who are the "worst of the worst?" Can a crime be so heinous that a defendant can be said to "deserve" to be executed? Would …

The Right To Effective Assistance Of Capital Postconviction Counsel: Constitutional Implications Of Statutory Grants Of Capital Counsel, Celestine Richards Mcconville

Celestine Richards McConville

The problem of incompetent counsel in capital cases is hardly a secret. Much of the attention, however, has focused on incompetent capital trial counsel. This article, by contrast, addresses the problem of incompetent capital counsel at the state and federal postconviction levels. Like the trial and direct review phases, the capital postconviction phase is critical to an accurate and reliable determination of guilt and death-eligibility. Thus, competent counsel is just as necessary during capital postconviction proceedings as it is during capital trial and direct review proceedings.

The Supreme Court, however, has made clear that there is no constitutional right to …