Law Reviews

Study Finds Race of Victim, Geography Are Key Factors In California Death Sentencing

According to a new study to be published in the Santa Clara Law Review, a defandant in California is more likely to be sentenced to death for killing a white person than for murdering a person of any other race, despite there being more black and Hispanic murder victims in the state. The research also shows that geography plays a key role in whether the death penalty will be sought in a particular case.

New Resource: A Review of Deterrence Studies and other Social Science Research

Robert Weisberg, a professor at Stanford University's School of Law, examines recent studies on deterrence and the death penalty, as well as other social science research ragarding capital punishment in the U.S. In The Death Penalty Meets Social Science: Deterrence and Jury Behavior Under New Scrutiny, Weisberg notes that many of the new studies claiming to find that the death penalty deters murder have been legitimately criticized for omitting key variables and for not addressing the potential distorting effect of one high-executing state, Texas.

NEW RESOURCE: Research Examines Those Who Volunteer for Execution

A new Michigan Law Review article by Professor John Blume of Cornell Law School examines the relationship between "volunteering" for execution and suicide.  Blume found that nearly 88% of all death row inmates who have "volunteered" for execution have struggled with mental illness and/or substance abuse. He writes that there is an especially strong link between "volunteerism" and mental illness. Of the "volunteer" executions he reviewed, 14 involved schizophrenia and several more reported delusions that may reflect schizophrenia. Depression and bipolar disorder accounted for at least 23 other cases, and post-traumatic stress disorder was present in another 10. At least 30 of those who "volunteered" for execution had previously attempted suicide.  The article also notes that between 1977 and 2003, 85% of the 93 inmates who opted to allow their execution to proceed without exhausting all legal appeals were white males, despite the fact that white males make up only 45% of all death row inmates.

NEW RESOURCE: The Death Penalty's Impact on U.S. Foreign Relations

A new law review article by international death penalty expert Mark Warren concludes that the retention of capital punishment in the United States distances the nation from its closest allies "in ways both symbolic and tangible, and the costs of that isolation are rising steadily." Warren's article, Death, Dissent, and Diplomacy: The U.S. Death Penalty as an Obstacle to Foreign Relations, examines a broad range of concerns, including treaty compliance and global security. Warren notes that in recent years, world leaders have become increasingly vocal about their opposition to the death penalty, and that the U.S. now finds itself on the wrong side of a fundamental human rights issue. Warren notes that some recent Supreme Court decisions narrowing the scope of the death penalty, as well as state efforts to identify flaws in the system, are steps in the right direction.

NEW RESOURCE: A Study of Exonerations in the U.S.

Newly published research examining 340 exonerations in the United States between 1989 and 2003 found that a significant number of those who were wrongly convicted had been sentenced to death. Researchers note that this finding appears to reflect two patterns: capital defendants are more likely to be convicted in error, and false convictions are more likely to be detected when defendants are on death row.

The paper, authored by Professor Samuel Gross of the University of Michigan Law School along with other assistants, reveals clear patterns associated with false convictions. The leading cause of wrongful convictions is perjury, including perjury by police officers, by jailhouse snitches, by the real killers, and by supposed participants and eyewitnesses to the crime who knew the innocent defedants in advance. The research revealed that false confessions, especially among vulnerable defendants such as juvenile offenders and those with mental retardation, also played a large role in murder convictions that led to exoneration. Almost all of the juvenile exonerees who falsely confessed were African American, and 90% of all exonerated juvenile defendants were African American or Hispanic.

Based on their review of these exonerations, the paper notes that "any plausible guess at the total number of miscarraiges of justice in American in the last fifteen years must run to the thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, in felony cases alone."

NEW RESOURCE: Research On Victim Impact Statements

A new research paper by Wayne A. Logan of the William Mitchell College of Law examines the constitutional, ethical and legal issues raised by victim impact evidence.  In his article, "Victims, Survivors and the Decisions to Seek and Impose Death," Logan notes that the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark 1991 decision in Payne v. Tennessee opened the door for survivors of murder victims to testify about the social, emotional, and economic losses resulting from the murder of their loved one.  Since this ruling, such testimony has been broadly used throughout the nation and can often be a major factor considered by jurors in capital punishment trials. 

NEW RESOURCE: The Lack of Constitutional Protections in Capital Sentencing Proceedings

A recent article in the Western New England Law Review examines ways in which the rules of evidence and procedures at capital sentencing trials are less rigorous than those applied at the guilt-phase of the trial. In capital sentencing hearings, evidence is permitted that would not be admissible to prove guilt. The defendant does not receive traditional trial protections at the sentencing trial. For example, hearsay may be received by the jury during sentencing, but is generally inadmissible at the guilt phase of the trial because it is considered unreliable.

NEW RESOURCE: Law Review Examines Competency To Waive Appeals in Capital Cases

A recent article in the Wayne Law Review by Prof. Phillys L. Crocker of the Cleveland-Marshall College of Law examines the Supreme Court's struggle with the issue of death row inmates waiving their appeals.  Crocker  uses Rees v. Peyton, a capital case that remained on the Court's docket from 1965-1995, to explore the issue. In that case, Virginia death row inmate Melvin Rees sought to withdraw his petition for a writ of certiorari so that he could be executed. In 1967, the Supreme Court stayed the proceeding after Rees was found incompetent to waive his appeal, but it did not dismiss the case until after he died of natural causes. In her article, Not to Decide is to Decide: The U.S. Supreme Court's Thirty-Year Struggle with One Case About Competency to Waive Death Penalty Appeals, Crocker concludes:

Syndicate content