Death Penalty Flashcards
What are aggravating factors?
- Factors that make the defendant more blameworthy.
- Special circumstances that the trier of fact considers in the sentencing phase of capital cases.
- The prosecution attempts to prove the presence of these in arguing for DP.
- e.g., age of victim, depravity of the crime, violent recidivism risk high, murder happened while committing another crime, level of indifference
What are mitigating factors?
- There are statutorily defined and nonstatutory mitigating factors
- Statutory: e.g., no prior criminal hx that was significant, EED/duress/MC, the victim was a participant in the homicide, circumstances show a moral justification, def was an accomplice/minor role in homicide, youth of def
- Nonstatutory: any evidence related to the def’s background and circumstances of the offense (e.g., hx of abuse)
Who decides the sentence in capital cases?
- Jury by beyond a reasonable doubt. Arizona precludes judges from doing this.
- There is a jury for each phase: bifurcated (guilt and sentencing) and trifurcated (guilt, eligibility for DP, and selection of penalty)
What can a defendant do to save themselves if given the DP as punishment?
State and federal appeals, postconviction petitions, federal habeus corpus reviews
Where are the majority of death row inmates held? 42% that is.
CA, FL, and TX
Which amendment of the Constitution is heavily implicated in capital case law/legal challenges to DP?
8th - cruel and unusual punishment clause
Furman v. Georgia (1976)
SCOTUS said DP was no unconstitutional, but the lack of specific guidelines was. Uncontrolled discretion was the problem. In GA, they were executing a disproportionate number of minorities, politically unpopular, poor, etc.
Woodson v. NC (1976)
SCOTUS overturned NC’s sentencing scheme. Due to Furman v. GA, many states rewrote DP statutes, and NC decided to make death mandatory for Murder 1 convictions. SCOTUS said this was unconstitutional in failing to account for individual (agg/mit) factors to be considered.
What was the case that brought DP back online in Georgia?
Gregg v. Georgia (1976).
- SCOTUS unheld GA’s sentencing scheme, that looked to mitigate the arbitrariness htat was struck down in Furman. Other states modeled theirs after Gregg.
- GA: (1) agg factor needs to be est BARD, (2) defense needs to be allowed to present mit facts/circumstances, (3) bifurcation of trial and sentencing necessary in capital cases
What is a proportionality review?
- Proportionality review: procedures that arose from Gregg’s sentencing scheme. Consider if sentence of death is excessive or disproportion to the penalty imposed in similar cases, weigh the crime and def.
Coker v. Georgia (1977)
SCOTUS ruled a punishment of death is grossly disproportionate and excessive for the crime of rape, and thus violated the 8th, because rape victims are alive, whereas homicide vics are not
Mnemonic: Coker can’t be choked, even if rape is terrible.
Lockett v. Ohio (1978)
Overturned Ohio’s DP provisions, because of same issue as in Woodson v. NC where an “individualized” approach was absent. A def can’t be limited in the type of mitigation they offer in the DP phase of trial, because any info can be considered relevant.
- Explore all avenues of mitigation
- Mnemonic: ‘You can’t lock out mitigation factors.’
Eddings v. Oklahoma (1982)
SCOTUS: A judge cannot exclude a mitigating factor from consideration. They may decide how much weight to give one.
Mnemonic: Ed can hold his weight, and can’t be excluded from the group.
Barefoot v. Estelle (1983)
Permitted psychiatric testimony in capital sentencing cases re: dangerouesness, despite clinical predictions lacking in specificity.
Mnemonic: it is dangerous to walk barefoot.
Skipper v. South Carolina (1986)
SCOTUS: Admit testimony by jail officers and others to aid in individualized consideration of mit/agg factors per Woodson v. NC.
