Death-qualified Juries, Death Penalty

Question 1

Witherspoon

Answer 1

a. Excludes nullifiers from jury
i. Those who were completely against death penalty

b. Called Witherspoon Excludables (WEs)

Question 2

Grigsby

Answer 2

a. Ellsworth study
i. Bifurcated jury process
1) Guilt/innocence
2) Death/No death

ii. Holding: “fireside induction” shows that removing anti-death jurors biases jury against accused

Question 3

Lockhart v. McCree

Answer 3

a. Legislative facts from lower court can’t bind higher court

Holding: CON does not prohibit removing for cause prospective jurors whose opposition to the death penalty is so strong that it would prevent or substantially impair the performance of their duties as jurors at the sentencing phase of the trial.

c. Dissent: Majority ignores social science.

Question 4

Saline study

Answer 4

a. No difference in homicide between states with death penalty/no death penalty
b. Death penalty doesn’t deter!

Question 5

Furman

Answer 5

Capital punishment cannot be justified on the basis of deterrent effect

Question 6

Gregg

Answer 6

a. Holding: Saline and Ehrlich are completely at odds but Death Penalty probably works as deterrent

b. Ehrlich study
i. Each execution saves lives of 8 future victims

   ii. Death penalty works as deterrent

Question 7

National Research Council (2012)

Answer 7

a. research to date on the effect of capital punishment on homicide is not informative about whether capital punishment decreases, increases, or has no effect on homicide rates.
i. committee recommends that these studies not be used to inform deliberations requiring judgments about the effect of the death penalty on homicide.

Question 8

McCleskey

Answer 8

a. Holding: the question is whether death penalty was properly applied in this case. Defendant must show purposeful discrimination in this case, which SCOTUS said he didn’t.
b. Dissent: Race of offender and victim are determinative of application of death penalty