Questioning Capital Punishment: Law, Policy, and Practice James R. Acker

Similar documents
Sentencing: The imposition of a criminal sanction by a judicial authority. (p.260)

Chapter 9. Sentencing, Appeals, and the Death Penalty

CHAPTER 14 PUNISHMENT AND SENTENCING CHAPTER OUTLINE. I. Introduction. II. Sentencing Rationales. A. Retribution. B. Deterrence. C.

NC Death Penalty: History & Overview

UNIVERSITY OF BALTIMORE SCHOOL OF LAW SPRING Capital Punishment and the Constitution Seminar LAW 871 (3 credits)

THE FUTURE OF AMERICA'S DEATH PENALTY

Chapter 12 CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. Introduction to Corrections CJC 2000 Darren Mingear

AGENCY BILL ANALYSIS 2017 REGULAR SESSION WITHIN 24 HOURS OF BILL POSTING, ANALYSIS TO: and

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendment Rights

Chapter 6 Sentencing and Corrections

PREFACE. The Constitution Project xv

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

A Statistical Portrait of the Death Penalty

Kansas Legislator Briefing Book 2014

Criminal Justice in America CJ Chapter 11 James J. Drylie, Ph.D.

CHAPTER 186. (Senate Bill 279) Criminal Law Death Penalty Repeal Evidence

California holds a special distinction in regards to the practice of capital punishment.

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF PENNSYLVANIA SENATE RESOLUTION

CRAFTING THE CASE AGAINST THE AMERICAN DEATH PENALTY

Table of Contents. 1 Crime and Corrections 1. 2 Corrections and Criminal Justice: An Overview 13. xvii. Preface

1/19/2004 8:03 PM HYLLENGRENMACROFINAL.DOC

SCOTUS Death Penalty Review. Lisa Soronen State and Local Legal Center

NC General Statutes - Chapter 15A Article 100 1

Kenneth Land, Raymond H. C. Teske, Jr., and Hui Zheng s (2012, this issue)

Abolishing Capital Punishment

Capital Punishment. The use of the death penalty to punish wrongdoers for certain crimes. Micki ONeal 12/5/2011

CENTER FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESEARCH, POLICY AND PRACTICE

Imprisonment is just one of several sentencing options.

For An Act To Be Entitled

Case 5:06-cr TBR Document 101 Filed 03/21/2008 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT PADUCAH

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Offender Population Forecasts. House Appropriations Public Safety Subcommittee January 19, 2012

Capital Punishment: Political and Moral Issue. execution occurring in Because America was still a main part of Great Britain many of its

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Montana's Death Penalty after State v. McKenzie

A Bill Regular Session, 2017 SENATE BILL 294

A. How Much is Life Without Parole Used for Murderers and Other Prisoners? B. Life Without Parole: An Alternative to the Death Penalty

Center for Criminal Justice Research, Policy & Practice: The Rise (and Partial Fall) of Illinois Prison Population. Research Brief

The Nebraska Death Penalty Study: An Interdisciplinary Symposium

A GUIDEBOOK TO ALABAMA S DEATH PENALTY APPEALS PROCESS

Remembering Furman s Comparative Proportionality: A Response to Smith and Staihar

AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONALISM VOLUME II: RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES Howard Gillman Mark A. Graber Keith E. Whittington. Supplementary Material

Death Penalty. Terry Lenamon on the. Terry Lenamon s List of State Death Penalty Mitigation Statutes (Full Text)

2/21/2011 AMERICAN CORRECTIONS 9 TH EDITION. Three elements:

S17A1758. VEAL v. THE STATE. Veal v. State, 298 Ga. 691 (784 SE2d 403) (2016) ( Veal I ). After a jury

A Deadly Bias: First-Time Offenders and Felony Murder

Deadly Justice. A Statistical Portrait of the Death Penalty. Appendix B. Mitigating Circumstances State-By-State.

Incarcerated America Human Rights Watch Backgrounder April 2003

ONE WAY OR ANOTHER THE DEATH PENALTY WILL BE ABOLISHED, BUT ONLY AFTER THE PUBLIC NO LONGER HAS CONFIDENCE IN ITS USE

CONFERENCE COMMITTEE REPORT BRIEF HOUSE BILL NO HB 2490 would amend various statutes related to criminal sentencing.

Idaho Prisons. Idaho Center for Fiscal Policy Brief. October 2018

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Lesson Plan Title Here

Should Capital Punishment Receive A Death Sentence? Capital punishment is one of the most controversial and polarizing topics that

Criminal Law - Death Penalty: Jury Discretion Bridled

(4) When the victim is under the age of twelve years. Lack of knowledge of the victim's age shall not be a defense.

STAT E ST AND A RDS F OR AP P OINTM ENT OF COU NS EL I N DE ATH P EN ALTY CAS ES

Joint Committee on Criminal Justice. Richard C. Dieter

AN ANALYSIS OF THE DEATH PENALTY 1. Abstract. This paper undertakes a survey of three facets of the death penalty: its

Florida s Criminal Justice System

THE DEATH PENALTY IN 2001: YEAR END REPORT

C A R D O Z O L AW R E V I E W FURMAN S RESURRECTION: PROPORTIONALITY REVIEW AND THE SUPREME COURT S SECOND CHANCE TO FULFILL FURMAN S PROMISE

Death Penalty. crimes. According to the Supreme Court rulings, the death penalty is not in violation of the

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

A GUIDE TO ROCKEFELLER DRUG REFORM: UNDERSTANDING THE NEW LEGISLATION. By Alan Rosenthal

SENATE, Nos. 171 and 2471 STATE OF NEW JERSEY 212th LEGISLATURE

Three Strikes Legislation

Crime and Punishment Reading

Smith v. Texas 125 S. Ct. 400 (2004)

1 SB By Senators Ward, Fielding, Keahey, Bedford, Whatley, Marsh, 4 Waggoner and Sanford. 5 RFD: Judiciary. 6 First Read: 14-FEB-13

SUBCHAPTER F PENNSYLVANIA COMMISSION ON SENTENCING

PREAMBLE Article I-Name Article II-Purpose Article III-Membership Article IV-Officers Article V- Regions...

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

SENATE BILL No February 14, 2017

CALIFORNIA v. BROWN SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. 479 U.S. 538; Argued December 2, 1986, Decided January 27, 1987

CCPR/C/USA/Q/4. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. United Nations

Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law

THE NEW YORK COURT OF APPEALS CRIMINAL LEAVE APPLICATION PRACTICE OUTLINE STUART M. COHEN, ESQ.

WYOMING VICTIMS RIGHTS LAWS¹

CHAPTER Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 1282

States revisit the death penalty

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) v. ) CRIMINAL NO GAO ) DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV )

In the Case of the Central City Drug Bust, suppose Harry and Daisy

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Books: Turow, Scott. The Ultimate Punishment: A Lawyer s Reflection on the Death Penalty. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. New York

U.S. Sentencing Commission Preliminary Crack Retroactivity Data Report Fair Sentencing Act

LA14-25 STATE OF NEVADA. Performance Audit. Fiscal Costs of the Death Penalty Legislative Auditor Carson City, Nevada

Practice Test. Law & the Courts -1-

(a) Except as provided in K.S.A Supp and , and amendments thereto, if a

CAMBIARE NASC 2018 AUGUST 15, 2018

No In The Supreme Court of the United States. SOPHAL PHON, Petitioner. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY Respon den t

RING AROUND THE JURY: REVIEWING FLORIDA S CAPITAL SENTENCING FRAMEWORK IN HURST V. FLORIDA

Sentencing Chronic Offenders

No. 51,811-KA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * *

Request Concerning the Ministry of Justice Study Group on the Death Penalty

Criminal Justice Today An Introductory Text for the 21 st Century

Transcription:

Questioning Capital Punishment: Law, Policy, and Practice James R. Acker Preface Acknowledgements PART I Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3 PART II Chapter 4 THE DEATH PENALTY S JUSTIFICATIONS: PRO AND CON Retribution (Just Deserts) A. The Death Penalty as Retributive Justice: A Case in Point? B. Retribution and Capital Punishment 1. Retributive Justice and the Principle of Proportionality 2. Is Capital Punishment Retributive Justice? 3. Objections to a Retributive Justification for the Death Penalty C. The Worst of the Worst Deterrence B. Deterrence and the Death Penalty: Law, Assumptions, and Logic 1. The Constitutional Perspective 2. The Logic (or Illogic) of Capital Punishment as a General Deterrent C. Might the Death Penalty Have a Brutalizing Effect? D. The Death Penalty, Deterrence, and Brutalization: What Does the Research Evidence Suggest? E. A Note on the Burden of Persuasion and Related Policy Issues F. Conclusion Incapacitation, Cost, and Consideration for Victims B. Incapacitation C. Cost D. Murder Victims and Their Survivors E. Conclusion DECIDING WHO DIES: LAW AND PRACTICE Capital Punishment for Murder: Sentencing Criteria and Procedures B. Capital Sentencing Decisions: From Early Statehood to Furman v. Georgia C. The 1976 Decisions and the Dawning of the Modern Era of Capital Punishment D. Beyond the 1976 Decisions: Doctrinal Refinements and Tensions 1. Nonarbitrariness and Individualization: Considering Mitigating

Evidence 2. Aggravating Factors: Form and Function E. Conclusion Chapter 5 Chapter 6 Chapter 7 PART III Chapter 8 Chapter 9 Proportionality: Offenses and Offenders B. Crimes Punishable by Death 1. Capital Punishment for Rape 2. The Death Penalty for (the Non-Trigger Person in) Felony Murder C. Offenders Punishable by Death 1. Juveniles 2. Intellectually Disabled (Mentally Retarded) Offenders 3. A Note About Severely Mentally Ill Offenders The New Death-Penalty Laws in Application: Race Discrimination and Arbitrariness B. Race Discrimination C. Arbitrariness: Gender and Geography 1. Gender Disparities 2. Geographic Disparities Defense Attorneys and Capital Jurors B. Capital Defense Attorneys C. The Capital Jury POST-CONVICTION Capital Errors: Procedural Issues and Actual Innocence B. Procedural Error C. Innocence The Final Stages: Death Row, Clemency, Execution B. Life Under Sentence of Death 1. Death Row Confinement 2. Competency for Execution C. Executive Clemency D. Execution E. Conclusion

PREFACE The Death Penalty in America: A Brief Introduction and Overview However else it might be described and the choices are many, covering the full spectrum that includes the ultimate form of justice and the ultimate injustice the death penalty is controversial. It has been since the country s beginning days. Capital punishment was authorized and practiced in all of the original states and under federal law. It has never been without both supporters and detractors. Several of the nation s Founding Fathers were familiar with the recently translated treatise, On Crimes and Punishments, written in 1764 by the Italian philosopher and jurist, Cesare Beccaria. The first sentence in the chapter devoted to the death penalty in this provocative work left little doubt about where Beccaria stood on the issue: This useless prodigality of torments, which has never made men better, has prompted me to examine whether death is really useful and just in a well-organized government. i His resounding repudiation of capital punishment in favor of life imprisonment, which at least some of his contemporaries found persuasive, contains kernels of many of the essential arguments made against the death penalty today. ii This is not to say that Beccaria s arguments, or those advanced by other opponents of capital punishment, have carried the day in this country. In an October 2013 Gallup Poll, a declining yet still decisive majority (60%) of respondents replied affirmatively to the question, Are you in favor of the death penalty for a person convicted of murder? iii At the end of 2013, 32 states, the federal government, and the United States Military authorized the death penalty for aggravated murder iv and, less regularly, for treason or other crimes threatening sovereign authority. v Well in excess of 3,000 prisoners were under sentence of death nationwide. vi More than 1,350 executions had been carried out since 1977, vii when they resumed after the Supreme

Court affirmed the constitutionality of the guided discretion capital sentencing legislation viii enacted in the wake of Furman v. Georgia (1972). ix In that landmark case, a bare majority of the justices, each offering a different rationale, relied on the 8 th Amendment s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishments to invalidate all death sentences then in effect throughout the country. Notwithstanding this showing of support for the death penalty, there is evidence that many Americans are ambivalent about capital punishment, if not opposed to it. As recently as 1994, four out of five (80%) Gallup Poll respondents reported favoring the death penalty for murder, a considerably higher rate than the 60% measure obtained in 2013. x When asked to choose whether death or life imprisonment without parole (LWOP) is the better penalty for murder, respondents in 2010 were almost evenly divided: 49% favored capital punishment, 46% favored LWOP, and 6% had no opinion. xi The past decade has seen six states dispense with their capital-punishment laws. New Jersey lawmakers repealed the state death penalty statute in 2007 and legislative repeal soon followed in four additional states (New Mexico, in 2009; Illinois, in 2011; Connecticut, in 2012; and Maryland, in 2013). xii In New York, the legislature declined to revive its capital punishment law after the state s highest court declared it unconstitutional in 2004. xiii Newly imposed death sentences have dropped dramatically since the mid-1990s. In 1995, 311 offenders were sentenced to death across the country. By 2000, the number of new death sentences had fallen to 224. Annual totals dropped to 140 in 2005; 109 in 2010; and 77 in 2012. xiv Executions also have been in decline. From a modern era high of 98 in 1999, 60 or fewer executions have been carried out annually since 2004, with 43 occurring in both 2011 and 2012. xv

My Purpose for Writing this Book, Disciplinary Perspectives, and the Intended Audience As even these basic facts and developments suggest, controversy surrounding the death penalty has long endured and it continues unabated. The materials in the following pages identify the principal fault lines and explore the dominant issues that help account for the widely divergent and often passionately held views about capital punishment. They are not presented to persuade or to promote the merits of different positions that might be taken, but rather to help stimulate more critical thought and discussion about them. The aim is to raise questions rather than purport to answer them, and to offer the footing needed to allow for more informed consideration and analysis of the key premises and points of disputation along the way. The readings draw on diverse disciplines and methodologies, as is necessary to do justice to the rich mix of issues that nestle at the core of the death penalty and its several dimensions. Capital punishment is an instrument of law. It is imposed pursuant to procedures that have been shaped in significant part by the constitutional rulings of the United States Supreme Court. Accordingly, a number of prominent Supreme Court decisions pertaining to the death penalty are presented in the pages that follow. The decisions have been edited substantially because of their length, although I have tried my best to preserve the essential arguments and reasoning employed by the justices. Occasional excerpts from oral arguments before the Supreme Court also are included, as are provisions from select death-penalty statutes and the views of legal scholars as expressed in law review articles and legal treatises. Also included are discussions of research studies that have addressed important empirical dimensions of capital punishment for example, its effectiveness as a deterrent to murder, its financial costs relative to life imprisonment, evidence of racial disparities or other arbitrariness in charging and sentencing decisions, whether death qualifying capital trial juries affects trial

outcomes, and many others. Additional readings focus on the ethics and morality of the death penalty, on its history, and on the politics of capital punishment. The variety and complexity of the foundational questions and issues pertaining to the death penalty invite and make relevant a broad array of disciplinary perspectives. This volume is intended for anyone who is interested in exploring the history and current status of capital punishment in this country, including its legal foundations, its justifications, and its empirical and policy dimensions. It is suitable for use in academic classes in criminal justice, political science, history, sociology, and related disciplines which either focus specifically on the death penalty, or else devote attention to issues of punishment and the administration of justice more generally. The readings are appropriate for undergraduate students and can serve as well in graduate seminars. The materials are designed to stimulate critical thinking and analysis and, hopefully, correspondingly lively discussion. The book is divided into three sections. The initial part examines the primary justifications offered in support of capital punishment as well as the principal objections raised against them. The focus then shifts to substantive (threshold eligibility) and procedural (selection) aspects of capital sentencing, including the performance of key actors who figure into punishment decisions. The last section covers post-conviction issues, including appeals, life under sentence of death, clemency, and executions. Entire volumes could easily be devoted to any and all of the individual topics addressed within the book s main sections. What can be presented here nevertheless is intended to help illuminate the undercurrents of the many important controversies surrounding the death penalty and, hopefully, also help inspire further reflection about them.

i Cesare Beccaria, On Crimes and Punishments 45 (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Co. 1963/1764, Henry Paolucci, trans.). ii John D. Bessler, Cruel & Unusual: The American Death Penalty and the Founders Eighth Amendment (Boston: Northeastern University Press 2012). iii Gallup, Death Penalty, retrieved November 15, 2013 from http://www.gallup.com/poll/1606/death-penalty.aspx. iv Death Penalty Information Center, States With and Without the Death Penalty, retrieved November 15, 2013, from http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/states-and-without-death-penalty. v U.S. Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Capital Punishment, 2011 Statistical Tables 5, Table 1 (July 2013), retrieved August 15, 2013 from http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/cp11st.pdf. vi Death Penalty Information Center, Death Row Inmates by State, retrieved November 15, 2013 from http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/death-row-inmates-state-and-size-death-row-year#state. vii Death Penalty Information Center, Executions by Year, retrieved December 6, 2013 from http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/executions-year. viii Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976); Proffitt v. Florida, 428 U.S. 242 (1976); Jurek v. Texas, 428 U.S. 262 (1976). ix 408 U.S. 238 (1972). x Gallup, supra note 3. xi Frank Newport, In U.S., 64% Support Death Penalty in Cases of Murder, (Nov. 8, 2010), retrieved August 15, 2013 from http://www.gallup.com/poll/144284/support-death-penalty-cases-murder.aspx. xii Death Penalty Information Center, supra note 4; Rob Warden, How and Why Illinois Abolished the Death Penalty, 30 Law & Inequality 245, 284-285 (2012). xiii People v. LaValle, 817 N.E.2d 341 (N.Y. 2004); People v. Taylor, 878 N.E.2d 969 (N.Y. 2007); James R. Acker, Be Careful What You Ask For: Lessons from New York s Recent Experiment With Capital Punishment, 32 Vermont Law Review 683 (2008). xiv U.S. Dept. of Justice, supra note 5, at 19 (Table 16); Death Penalty Information Center, The Death Penalty in 2012: Year End Report 1 (Dec. 2012), retrieved November 15, 2013 from http://deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/2012yearend.pdf. xv Death Penalty Information Center, Executions by Year, supra note 7.