Problems 40 years ago A. The death penalty was randomly applied

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Punishment and Sentencing
Advertisements

NC Court System.
Appeal and Postconviction Relief
1. CRAFTING A PENALTY CLOSING ARGUMENT October 24,
Chapter 14 Sentencing and Appeals. History of Sentencing in the U.S.  old English common law punished felonies with the death penalty  old English common.
Department of Criminal Justice California State University - Bakersfield CRJU 330 Race, Ethnicity and Criminal Justice Dr. Abu-Lughod, Reem Ali Color of.
16.2- Criminal Cases.
Chapter 20: Civil Liberties: Protecting Individual Rights Section 4
The 8 th Amendment & the Death Penalty. The 8 th Amendment Forbids: Forbids: Excessive Bail/Fines Excessive Bail/Fines Cruel & Unusual Punishment Cruel.
FrontPage: Do you support capital punishment? Why or why not?
The Death Penalty 8 th Amendment – Cruel and Unusual Punishment?
Criminal Justice Process: Sentencing and Corrections 1. Sentencing Options 2. Purposes of Punishment 3. Parole 4. Capital Punishment 5. Corrections.
CJ230: Criminal Law for Criminal Justice
Chapter 11 Punishment and Sentencing
Supreme Court Cases. Solem V. Helm Issue: Was Helm’s constitutional right of freedom from cruel and unusual punishment violated?
The Court-Martial Process Military Law – Week 8 Jay Canham.
Capital Punishment McCleskey v. Kemp 481 U.S. 279.
Theories of Punishment “Punishment and Responsibility,” 442;; Dolinko, “The Future of Punishment,” 449; Moore, The Argument for Retributivism, 456; “The.
1 Sentencing Decisions Chapter Sixteen. 2 Lady Justice Right hand: scales of justice symbolizing fairness in the administration of justice. Eyes: blindfold,
Death Penalty Debate: Resolved… The use of the death penalty, if fairly applied, does not violate the Constitution and is a just method of punishing perpetrators.
A play by Reginald Rose. Be ready to share the following questions with the class. Are you one who is quick to jump to conclusions or do you like to hear.
The Scottsboro Case The Criminal Justice Process: An Overview.
Capital Punishment Bigger than Lowercase Punishment.
Criticism of the CJS Forensics 5.1 October 6,
Chapter 9 Punishment and Sentencing
ADVANCED AMERICAN GOVERNMENT. BAIL AND PREVENTATIVE DETENTION  BAIL  Sum of money the accused may be required to post as a guarantee that he or she.
The Death Penalty: Deterrence and Question of Racial Equality
The Death Penalty in Delaware: An Empirical Study John Blume, Ted Eisenberg, Valerie Hans & Sheri Johnson Cornell Death Penalty Project, Cornell Law School.
Wash, Rinse, Repeat Prof. Wes Reber Porter Threaten enhancement coerce plea.
Death Penalty Comparing the death penalty in Georgia and the United States to the rest of the World.
1. Explain retribution to deter crime At one time the primary reason for punishing a criminal was RETRIBUTION. This is the idea behind the saying “an.
Purpose of Punishment Corrections. Retribution – An eye for an eye; a tooth for a tooth. – Society, through the criminal justice system, taking on the.
1 Social and Economic Inequalities: Housing & Crime 1.Describe the inequalities that exist in housing in the USA and give reasons to explain these inequalities.
Introduction to Criminal Justice Sentencing, Appeals, and the Death Penalty Chapter Nine Bohm and Haley.
TYPES OF LAW. CIVIL LAW Civil Law deals with wrongs against a group or individual. The harmed individual becomes the plaintiff in a civil law suit and.
Mitigation and Aggravation Material from Tiersma, “Dictionaries and Death: Do Capital Jurors Understand Mitigation” Utah Law Review (Vol. 1: 1995)
SENTENCING AND CORRECTIONS CHAPTER 15 PAGES
Sentencing and the Correctional Process
Death Row Inmates 2005 BLACK 41.7% HISPANIC 10.4% WHITE 45.5% OTHER 2.3%
PUNISHMENT Chapter 20, Section 4 8 th Amendment. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments.
Statistics 3 Resource Activities. Activity Is the color distribution of M&Ms independent of the type of candy? Break open bags of plain and peanut M&Ms.
© 2015 Cengage Learning Chapter 9 Punishment and Sentencing.
© 2015 Cengage Learning Chapter 11 Punishment and Sentencing Chapter 11 Punishment and Sentencing © 2015 Cengage Learning.
Racial Disparities Race and Criminal Justice. The Criminal inJustice System.
Chapter 20: Civil Liberties: Protecting Individual Rights Section 4
April 17, 2017 CNN Student News Review Questions Rights of the accused
Chapter 11 Criminal Justice
Sentencing and Modern reform: the process of punishment
Race and Criminal Justice
Do Now – 9/20/16 12 Angry Men – Anticipation Questions
9 Sentencing.
Chapter 3 Sentencing: To Punish or to Reform?
How do the fifth, sixth and eighth amendments protect rights within the judicial system? LESSON 32.
Chapter 9 Punishment and Sentencing
Chapter 20: Civil Liberties: Protecting Individual Rights Section 4
Chapter 20: Civil Liberties: Protecting Individual Rights Section 4
Today’s Learning Goal:
C10: Punishment and Sentencing
Court Case Proceedings
Chapter 20: Civil Liberties: Protecting Individual Rights Section 4
Chapter Twenty The Death Penalty
The death penatly In the USA.
Bellringer #4 Several European countries have gotten rid of capital punishment (death penalty) entirely while the U.S. has not. Do you believe that the.
Criminal Justice Process: Sentencing & Corrections
Chapter 11 – Criminal Justice
Capital Punishment.
Sentencing.
Gregg vs Georgia.
LAW OF JURY SELECTION (SPRING 2019)
Presentation transcript:

Problems 40 years ago A. The death penalty was randomly applied “Of all the people convicted of [murder], many just as reprehensible as these, the petitioners are among a capriciously selected random handful upon whom the sentence of death has in fact been imposed.” Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. at 309-10 (1972) (Stewart, J., concurring)

Problems 40 years ago B. The death penalty was not so randomly applied “[I]f any basis can be discerned for the selection of these few to be sentenced to die, it is the constitutionally impermissible basis of race.” Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. at 310 (1972) (Stewart, J., concurring)

Washington’s Solutions Limit eligibility Narrow prosecutorial and jury discretion Mandatory review

Washington’s Solutions Limit eligibility to aggravated first degree murder Started with 10 aggravating circumstances; now 14 Interpreted broadly

Washington’s Solutions Narrow discretion File death notice only “when there is reason to believe that there are not sufficient mitigating circumstances to merit leniency” Jury must find absence of sufficient mitigating circumstances unanimously and beyond a reasonable doubt

Washington’s Solutions Mandatory proportionality review Supreme Court must determine whether sentence is excessive or disproportionate to the penalty imposed in other aggravated murder cases. Washington Supreme Court has never reversed a death sentence under this provision.

Washington’s Failures: Random Application Since 1981: ~ 300 adults convicted of aggravated murder 5 executed 9 on death row These 14 not worse than the 286

Washington’s Failures: Random Application Equal justice under the law is the state’s primary responsibility. And in death penalty cases, I’m not convinced equal justice is being served.

Washington’s Failures: Random Application The death penalty is like lightening, randomly striking some defendants and not others. Where the death penalty is not imposed on Gary Ridgway, Ben Ng, and Kwan Fai Mak, who represent the worst mass murders in Washington's history, on what basis do we determine on whom it is imposed?

Washington’s Failures: Random Application One could better predict whether the death penalty will be imposed on Washington’s most brutal murderers by flipping a coin than by evaluating the crime and the defendant.

Washington’s Failures: Not-so-random I concur with Justice Fairhurst's amply supported analysis of the random and arbitrary nature of the imposition of the death penalty in Washington. I write separately to add my deep concern that the death penalty might be much more predictable than we have recognized. I refer, of course, to the race of the defendant. It appears that “African American defendants are more likely to receive the death penalty than Caucasian defendants,” and we should study “whether the disparity is statistically significant.”

Current Litigation: State v. Gregory African American man sentenced to death for aggravated murder of one white woman in Pierce County

Current Litigation: State v. Gregory He was 24 years old at time of crime Only prior felony was theft of a skateboard

Beckett Report

The data set Trial Judge Reports for aggravated murders (adults) Supreme Court uses them for proportionality review They include information about the crime and defendant for each aggravated murder

Analysis and Results Controlling for case characteristics like: Number of victims Number of aggravating circumstances Number of mitigating circumstances Criminal history Victim suffering

Analysis and Results Most of the variation in sentencing cannot be explained by case characteristics. African Americans are 4.5 times more likely to be sentenced to death than other defendants.

Response It’s time to call it. The death penalty is unconstitutional.

Questions / References Beckett Report: https://lsj.washington.edu/sites/lsj/files/research/capit al_punishment_beckettevans_10-1.6.14.pdf Video of oral argument in State v. Gregory: http://www.tvw.org/watch/?eventID=2016021270 E-mail: lila@washapp.org