Misplaced Pages

#193806

41-410: DPIC does not take a formal position on the death penalty but is critical of how it is administered. As a result, some have referred to it as an anti-death penalty organization. According to a pro-death penalty prosecutor, DPIC is "probably the single most comprehensive and authoritative internet resource on the death penalty" but "makes absolutely no effort to present any pro-death penalty views." However,

82-401: A lawyer (or parties when representing themselves) of the legal reasons why they should prevail. Oral argument at the appellate level accompanies written briefs , which also advance the argument of each party in the legal dispute. Oral arguments can also occur during motion practice when one of the parties presents a motion to the court for consideration before trial, such as when the case

123-538: A few homicides, including an especially heinous case in Texas where several young women were raped and strangled. Many thought the decision heralded the end of capital punishment in the United States. The next day, columnist Barry Schweid wrote that it was "unlikely" that the death penalty could exist anymore in the United States but there was a backlash and public support for the death penalty increased dramatically after

164-525: A page devoted to U.S. executions that death-penalty experts have considered to have been "botched." This includes a statistical analysis by Amherst College Prof. Austin Sarat , which found 276 executions between 1890 and 2010 that Sarat deemed to be botched. His definition of "botched" was an execution that deviated from the established execution protocol in a manner that "involv[ed] unanticipated problems or delays that caused, at least arguably, unnecessary agony for

205-488: A sentencing phase where mitigating or aggravating evidence could be presented to the jury. After McGautha the infrequency and apparent randomness of sentencing in capital cases raised concerns about arbitrary imposition of the death penalty and the potentially improper influence of factors like race and financial resources on sentencing outcomes. William Henry Furman , Lucious Jackson and Elmer Branch were three petitioners sentenced to death for aggravated felonies. Furman

246-423: Is also true that when a motion is made before or during trial that the lawyers conduct themselves before the judge in a manner similar to the presentation of the case on appeal, the lawyers present their arguments to the judge in a more conversational mode; in some pre-trial proceedings these appearances may not be recorded by court stenographers as they are invariably recorded in appellate proceedings. Oral argument

287-437: Is highly implausible that only the worst criminals or the criminals who commit the worst crime are selected for this punishment. Justice Marshall said Americans "know almost nothing about capital punishment" and would not "knowingly support purposeless vengeance". Marshall rejected the deterrence justification by concluding "the death penalty is no more effective a deterrent than life imprisonment." Marshall commented further on

328-410: Is imposed under such a procedure that gives room for the play of such prejudices. Justices William J. Brennan and Thurgood Marshall concluded that the death penalty was in itself "cruel and unusual punishment" because it was excessive, served no valid legislative purpose and was incompatible with the evolving standards of decency of a contemporary society. In his concurrence Justice Brennan said

369-416: Is not always considered an essential part of due process , as the briefs also give the parties an opportunity to be heard by the court. Whether a court will permit, require, or guarantee the opportunity to present oral argument is a decision usually left up to each court to decide as part of its rules of procedure, with differences from court to court even within a single jurisdiction. Some courts may guarantee

410-583: Is to be dismissed on a point of law, or when summary judgment may lie because there are no factual issues in dispute. Oral argument operates by each party in a case taking turns to speak directly to the judge or judges with an equal amount of time allotted to each. A party may often reserve part of their time to be used for rebuttal after their adversary has presented. Presenting lawyers usually cannot simply make speeches or read their briefs when presenting oral argument to an appellate court. Unlike trial court procedure, where judges intervene only when asked by

451-554: The Furman decision. According to Stephen F. Smith the increase of public support for the death penalty was driven by the "politicization of the death penalty". He says "the number of executions might well have continued to decline but for the Court's effort, in the early 1970s, to impose constitutional limits on capital punishment". During the next four years, 35 states and the federal government enacted death penalty statutes intended to overcome

SECTION 10

#1733085742194

492-453: The Gregg plurality opinion): I cannot agree that retribution is a constitutionally impermissible ingredient in the imposition of punishment...When people begin to believe that organized society is unwilling or unable to impose upon criminal offenders the punishment they "deserve", then there are sown the seeds of anarchy—of self-help, vigilante justice and lynch law. Justice Stewart was concerned

533-546: The United States House Committee on the Judiciary asked DPIC for assistance in identifying the risks that innocent people might be executed. That request led to the creation of DPIC's Innocence List. DPIC has continued to update the list, which as of February 1, 2023, documented 190 exonerations of persons who had been wrongly convicted and sentenced to death. The list does not include individuals who are innocent of

574-755: The DPIC's award-winning Educational Curriculum on the Death Penalty includes a discussion of commonly raised arguments both for and against the death penalty. In June 2022, on the 50th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Furman v. Georgia , DPIC released its Death Penalty Census, which covers the period from 1972 to January 1, 2021. The database was the result of a years-long effort. The Death Penalty Census will be updated periodically, includes death sentences imposed in U.S. state, federal, and military courts, and includes numerous details about each case. Robert Dunham

615-501: The U.S. Death Penalty. Associated Press described the report as "a history lesson in how lynchings and executions have been used in America and how discrimination bleeds into the entire criminal justice system. It traces a line from lynchings of old—killings outside the law—where Black people were killed in an effort to assert social control during slavery and Jim Crow, and how that eventually translated into state-ordered executions." In 1993,

656-599: The U.S. Supreme Court cited data on the DPIC webpage a total of eight times—and in all three opinions—in the 2015 lethal injection case, Glossip v. Gross . Furman v. Georgia Furman v. Georgia , 408 U.S. 238 (1972), was a landmark criminal case in which the United States Supreme Court decided that arbitrary and inconsistent imposition of the death penalty violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, and constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. It

697-453: The United States. Dozens of states rewrote their death penalty laws, most of which were upheld in the 1976 case Gregg v. Georgia . The Supreme Court consolidated the cases Jackson v. Georgia and Branch v. Texas with the Furman decision, thereby invalidating the death penalty for rape ; this ruling was confirmed post- Gregg in Coker v. Georgia . The Court had also intended to include

738-605: The case of Aikens v. California , but between the time Aikens had been heard in oral argument and a decision was to be issued, the Supreme Court of California decided in California v. Anderson that the death penalty violated the state constitution; Aikens was therefore dismissed as moot , since this decision reduced all death sentences in California to life imprisonment . There were over 600 inmates on death row when Furman

779-502: The changing standards of decency and public opinion was a legislative function: The widely divergent views of the Amendment expressed in today's opinions reveal the haze that surrounds this constitutional command. Yet it is essential to our role as a court that we not seize upon the enigmatic character of the guarantee as an invitation to enact our personal predilections into law. Blackmun and Burger also stated that they personally opposed

820-430: The court's concerns about the arbitrary imposition of the death penalty. Many of the new statutes that mandated bifurcated trials, with separate guilt-innocence and sentencing phases, and imposed standards guiding juries and judges during the penalty phase, were upheld in a series of Supreme Court decisions in 1976, beginning with Gregg v. Georgia where the Court said that "a carefully drafted statute that ensures that

861-409: The death penalty was being applied "capriciously". There was no good explanation for why jurors imposed the death sentence in the three cases before the Court but not other cases "just as reprehensible as these". In one of the most famous quotes from the case Justice Stewart said "These death sentences are cruel and unusual in the same way that being struck by lightning is cruel and unusual." If there

SECTION 20

#1733085742194

902-488: The death penalty was imposed so infrequently that the penological justification of deterrence was weakened and there was "no meaningful basis for distinguishing the few cases in which it is imposed from the many cases in which it is not". Deterrence was not the only penological justification discussed in the opinions. Justice Stewart said retributive punishment was a constitutionally permissible "ingredient" of punishment (a view subsequently supported by only four Justices in

943-563: The death penalty, and would vote against it, or "restrict it to a small category of the most heinous crimes", but that it was constitutional. The Supreme Court's decision marked the first time the Justices vacated a death sentence under the Eighth Amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause, resulting in over 630 death sentences being vacated and reduced to life imprisonment . There were not many cases of serious recidivism, but there were

984-463: The death penalty...in these cases constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments." A majority of Justices agreed that arbitrariness in capital sentencing violated the Eighth Amendment. However, the justices could not agree as to a rationale. There was not any signed opinion of the court or any plurality opinion as none of the five justices in the majority joined

1025-636: The founding attorney of the Roderick and Solange MacArthur Justice Center, and Michael Millman . DPIC has received funding from a number of American philanthropic foundations. In 2009, the organization also received funding from the European Union . DPIC has been ranked among the Top Criminal Justice Nonprofits by Philanthropedia. DPIC releases an annual report on the death penalty, highlighting significant developments and trends and featuring

1066-614: The grounds that a majority of the executions on it "did not involve the infliction of pain, but were only delayed by technical problems", such as difficulty in finding a suitable vein. However, the list also contains cases of prisoners catching on fire in electric chair executions, a prisoner moaning and banging his head against a steel pole in a gas chamber execution carried out by a drunk executioner in Mississippi in 1983, and numerous instances of coughing, spasming, groaning, and gasping during executions. The majority and dissenting justices of

1107-520: The latest statistics. The center also produces in-depth reports on various issues related to the death penalty such as arbitrariness, costs, innocence, and race. In November 2018, it issued a major report on lethal-injection secrecy entitled, Behind the Curtain: Secrecy and the Death Penalty in the United States. In September 2020, it issued a new report on race and the death penalty entitled, Enduring Injustice: The Persistence of Racial Discrimination in

1148-409: The low rate of jury imposed sentences, relative to number of death penalty eligible cases, indicated that sentencing outcomes were unconstitutionally arbitrary: When the punishment of death is inflicted in a trivial number of the cases in which it is legally available, the conclusion is virtually inescapable that it is being inflicted arbitrarily ...When the rate of infliction is at this low level, it

1189-593: The murder, but were involved in the crime in some lesser manner, or innocent prisoners who nonetheless pled guilty or no-contest to lesser crimes they did not commit in order to ensure their release from prison. In February 2021, DPIC issued a Special Report: The Innocence Epidemic, analyzing the causes and demographics of the wrongful capital convictions and death sentences that had led to the then-185 death-row exonerations since 1973. DPIC found that these wrongful capital convictions had taken place in 118 different counties across 29 different states. The DPIC website contains

1230-408: The opinion of any other. It was the longest set of opinions the Court had ever written, over 233 pages. Furman did not rule that the death penalty itself was unconstitutional. The median justices Potter Stewart and Byron White were concerned that erratic and arbitrary imposition of the death penalty violated the constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Justice White said

1271-529: The other cases were pending at the United States Supreme Court the Attorney General filed a petition for certiorari claiming that California had attempted to evade Supreme Court jurisdiction by applying an identical provision in the state constitution. The petition was denied and Aikens was remanded to state court. The Court's one-paragraph per curiam opinion held that "the imposition of

Death Penalty Information Center - Misplaced Pages Continue

1312-399: The parties to resolve objections, it is typical for judges at the appellate level to be active participants in oral argument, interrupting the presenting lawyers and asking questions. This is true even of courts that are formed of panels of multiple judges, such as the United States Supreme Court , where a presenting lawyer must be prepared to handle questions from any of the nine justices. It

1353-497: The possibility of wrongful execution , writing: No matter how careful courts are, the possibility of perjured testimony, mistaken honest testimony and human error remain too real. We have no way of judging how many innocent persons have been executed, but we can be certain that there were some. Chief Justice Warren Burger and Justices Harry Blackmun , Lewis F. Powell , and William H. Rehnquist , each appointed by President Richard Nixon , dissented. They argued that determining

1394-551: The prisoner or that reflect[ed] gross incompetence of the executioner." The page features a list and brief description of botched executions in the modern U.S. death-penalty era, which included 51 examples as of March 1, 2018. In 2008, the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral arguments in Baze v. Rees , a case challenging the three-drug cocktail used for many executions by lethal injection . The respondent's lawyer, Roy T. Englert, Jr., criticized DPIC's botched executions list, on

1435-413: The right to present oral argument, either requiring the parties to request to present or their waiver if they do not wish to, while other courts may require oral argument without the ability to waive it. Courts may also have the discretion to decide a case without presentation of oral argument, rendering their judgment entirely based on the arguments set forth in the parties' briefs. David Tatel , judge in

1476-425: The sentencing authority is given adequate information and guidance" would meet the constitutional standard of Furman . Other statutes enacted in response to Furman, such as Louisiana's , which mandated imposition of the death penalty upon conviction of certain crimes, were invalidated for cases of that same year. Oral argument Oral arguments are spoken presentations to a judge or appellate court by

1517-424: Was a per curiam decision. Five justices each wrote separately in support of the decision. Although the justices did not rule that the death penalty was unconstitutional, the Furman decision invalidated the death sentences of nearly 700 people. The decision mandated a degree of consistency in the application of the death penalty. This case resulted in a de facto moratorium of capital punishment throughout

1558-431: Was any identifiable basis for why the death penalty was imposed in these cases, it was "the constitutionally impermissible basis of race". Three justices raised concerns about racial bias. Justice Douglas said : It would seem to be incontestible that the death penalty inflicted on one defendant is 'unusual' if it discriminates against him by reason of his race, religion, wealth, social position, or class, or if it

1599-592: Was convicted of murder and sentenced to death. Jackson and Branch were convicted of rape (the victims were white, and in Branch's case 65 years old). The case of Earnest James Aikens was dropped from the Furman case because the California Supreme Court decided in People v. Anderson that the death penalty was unconstitutional under the state constitution. Because the California Supreme Court knew that Aikens and

1640-428: Was decided. Most states at that time did not allow the presentation of mitigating and aggravating evidence that today is a constitutionally required part of individualized consideration at sentencing. In McGautha v. California , decided thirteen months before Furman , the Court held that due process did not require instructions to the jury about standards to guide sentencing in capital cases. The Court also rejected

1681-446: Was the center's executive director from March 2015 through January 2023, succeeding Richard Dieter. Dieter had been executive director since 1992 when the original director, Michael A. Kroll resigned. George H. Kendall, of counsel at the national law firm, Squire Patton Boggs , is president of the board of directors. He succeeded David J. Bradford, co-chairman of the litigation department for the national law firm, Jenner & Block , and

Death Penalty Information Center - Misplaced Pages Continue

#193806