The Death Penalty

440 Pages·05.738 MB·English

by  Scott Vollum & Rolando V. del Carmen & Durant Frantzen & Claudia San Miguel & Kelly Cheeseman

The Death Penalty
Constitutional Issues, Commentaries, and Case Briefs
2
The Death Penalty
Constitutional Issues, Commentaries, and Case Briefs
Third Edition
Scott Vollum
University of Minnesota, Duluth
Rolando V. del Carmen
Sam Houston State University
Durant Frantzen
Texas A&M University, San Antonio
Claudia San Miguel
Texas A&M International University
Kelly Cheeseman
Messiah College
3
First published 2005 by Anderson Publishing
Published 2015 by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
Acquiring Editor: Pam Chester
Editorial Project Manager: Ellen S. Boyne
Project Manager: Priya Kumaraguruparan
Designer: Russell Purdy
Third Edition: Copyright © 2015 Taylor & Francis. All rights reserved.
Second Edition: Copyright © 2008, 2005 Matthew Bender & Company Inc., a member of the LexisNexis Group Newark, NJ
No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or
hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from
the publishers.
Notices
No responsibility is assumed by the publisher for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or
otherwise, or from any use of operation of any methods, products, instructions or ideas contained in the material herein.
Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in evaluating and using any information, methods,
compounds, or experiments described herein. In using such information or methods they should be mindful of their own safety and the safety of
others, including parties for whom they have a professional responsibility.
Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to
infringe.
 This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher (other than as may be noted herein).
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
The death penalty / Scott Vollum, Rolando V. del Carmen, Durant Frantzen, Claudia San Miguel,
Kelly Cheeseman.–Third edition. p. cm.
1. Capital punishment–United States. I. Vollum, Scott, 1970-author. II. Del Carmen, Rolando V.
author. III. Frantzen, Durant, author.
KF9227.C2D4117 2014
345.73’0773–dc23
  2014001186
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
ISBN 978-1-4557-7633-7 (pbk)
4
We dedicate this edition to our co-author Kelly Cheeseman. We will remember her sense of humor, dedication to
her students, and her passion for her profession. Kelly will be greatly missed.
5
Contents
Preface to the Third Edition
Preface to the Second Edition
Preface and Introduction to the First Edition
About the Authors
Acknowledgments
Online Resources
Table of Cases
Top Ten Most Significant Death Penalty Cases
CHAPTER 1 The Death Penalty: Past and Present
I. Introduction
II. A Retrospective Analysis of the Death Penalty
A. The Colonial Period
B. The Age of Enlightenment and the Early Movement to Abolish the Death Penalty
1. From Europe to the Colonies: The Impact of Enlightenment
2. Changes in the Death Penalty from 1790–1950
III. Early Supreme Court Decisions on the Death Penalty
A. Wilkerson v. Utah: Death by Firing Squad
B. In re Kemmler: Death by Electrocution
C. Louisiana ex rel. Francis v. Resweber: The Constitutionality of Being Executed Twice
D. Additional Changes in the Death Penalty Prior to 1972
IV. The Current Status of the Death Penalty in the United States
A. Retentionist versus Abolitionist States
B. A Decline in Death Sentences and Executions
C. Recent Supreme Court and Circuit Court Rulings
V. In Summary, What Do These Cases Say?
VI. Conclusion
Cases Briefed in Chapter 1
Case Briefs
Wilkerson v. Utah, 99 U.S. 130 (1878)
In re Kemmler, 136 U.S. 436 (1890)
6
Louisiana ex rel. Francis v. Resweber, 329 U.S. 459 (1947)
Key Terms
Critical Thinking Questions
Internet Resources
CHAPTER 2 The Foundation Cases: Furman v. Georgia and Gregg v. Georgia
I. Introduction
II. Furman v. Georgia (1972): The Death Penalty Is Unconstitutional
A. The Background
B. The Facts
C. The Majority Opinions
D. The Dissenting Opinions
III. Gregg v. Georgia (1976): The Death Penalty Is Constitutional in Some Cases
A. The Background
B. The Facts
C. The Majority Opinions
D. The Dissenting Opinions
IV. In Summary, What Do These Cases Say?
V. Conclusion
Cases Briefed in Chapter 2
Case Briefs
Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972)
Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976)
Key Terms
Critical Thinking Questions
Internet Resources
CHAPTER 3 Race and the Death Penalty
I. Introduction
II. Bias in Death Penalty Cases and Jury Selection in Capital Proceedings
III. Legislative Responses to Discrimination in Capital Proceedings
A. Federal Response: The Proposed Racial Justice Act and Its Failure
B. State Responses: Racial Justice Acts and Examination of Statistical Disparities
IV. The Legal Community: An Assessment of Prosecutors and Defense Attorneys
A. District Attorneys
B. Defense Attorneys
V. The Jury: A Biased Bunch or Victims of Misinformation?
A. Jury Selection
B. Peremptory Challenges
7
VI. In Summary, What Do These Cases Say?
VII. Conclusion
Cases Briefed in Chapter 3
Case Briefs.
Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986)
McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279 (1987)
Turner v. Murray, 476 U.S. 28 (1986)
Miller-El v. Dretke, 545 U.S. 231 (2005)
Snyder v. Louisiana, 552 U.S. 472 (2008)
Key Terms
Critical Thinking Questions
Internet Resources
CHAPTER 4 The Mentally Impaired and the Death Penalty
I. Introduction
II. Supreme Court Cases: Past and Present
A. A Starting Point: Penry v. Lynaugh (1989)
B. Executing the Mentally Retarded Is Unconstitutional: Atkins v. Virginia (2002)
C. Cases After Atkins
III. Issues with Mental Impairment in Capital Cases
A. Definition of Mental Retardation/Developmental Disability
B. The Fear of Faking
C. Mental Retardation versus Mental Illness
IV. Insanity and the Death Penalty
A. Insanity: Different From Other Mental Impairments
B. Reasons for Not Executing the Insane
1. Failure to Achieve Penological Goals
a. Deterrence
b. Retribution
2. Theological
3. Humanity
C. Mental Competence and the Death Penalty
V. In Summary, What Do These Cases Say?
VI. Conclusion
Cases Briefed in Chapter 4
Case Briefs
Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399 (1986)
Penry v. Lynaugh, 492 U.S. 302 (1989)
Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002)
8
Singleton v. Norris, 319 F.3d 1018 (8TH CIR. 2003)
Tennard v. Dretke, 542 U.S. 274 (2004)
Panetti v. Quarterman, 551 U.S. 930 (2007)
Bobby v. Bies, 556 U.S. 825 (2009)
Ryan v. Gonzales/Tibbals v. Carter, 568 U.S. ___ (2013)
Key Terms
Critical Thinking Questions
Internet Resources
CHAPTER 5 The Death Penalty for Juveniles
I. Introduction
II. Thompson v. Oklahoma: Executing Juveniles Age 15 and Younger Is Unconstitutional
A. Facts
B. The Court’s Holding
C. Reasoning
III. Stanford v. Kentucky: Executing Juveniles Ages 16 to 17 Is Constitutional
A. Facts
B. The Court’s Holding
C. Reasoning
IV. Atkins v. Virginia: A Case Involving the Mentally Retarded, But a Prelude to the Abolition of the
Juvenile Death Penalty
A. The Issue and Holding
B. Significance of Atkins for the Juvenile Death Penalty: The Missouri Supreme Court’s Decision in
Simmons v. Roper
V. Roper v. Simmons: The Supreme Court Declares the Execution of Juveniles Unconstitutional
A. Facts
B. The Holding
C. Majority Opinion
D. Dissenting Opinions
VI. Evolving Standards and Future Issues Concerning the Sentencing of Juveniles
VII. In Summary, What Do These Cases Say?
VIII. Conclusion
Cases Briefed in Chapter 5
Case Briefs
Thompson v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 815 (1988)
Stanford v. Kentucky, 492 U.S. 361 (1989)
Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005)
Key Terms
Critical Thinking Questions
9
Internet Resources
CHAPTER 6 Juries, Jurors, and the Death Penalty
I. Introduction
II. The Ultimate Responsibility: Bifurcated Trials and the Role of Capital Juries
A. Jury Override: Judges Trumping Juries
B. Ring v. Arizona (2002): The End of Judicial Sentencing in Capital Cases?
III. Jury Instructions: Guided Discretion in Capital Cases
A. Guilt Phase: Lesser Included Offenses
B. Penalty Phase: Future Dangerousness and Parole Eligibility
IV. Jury Selection in Capital Cases: Death Qualification
V. In Summary, What Do These Cases Say?
VI. Conclusion
Cases Briefed in Chapter 6
Case Briefs
Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 (1968)
Beck v. Alabama, 447 U.S. 625 (1980)
Lockhart v. McCree, 476 U.S. 162 (1986)
Mills v. Maryland, 486 U.S. 367 (1988)
Morgan v. Illinois, 504 U.S. 719 (1992)
Simmons v. South Carolina, 512 U.S. 154 (1994)
Weeks v. Angelone, 528 U.S. 225 (2000)
Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002)
Uttecht v. Brown, 551 U.S. 1 (2007)
Key Terms
Critical Thinking Questions
Internet Resources
CHAPTER 7 The Right to Effective Assistance of Counsel and the Death Penalty
I. Introduction
II. Strickland: A Two-Part Test for Deciding Ineffective Assistance Claims
III. Ineffective Assistance of Counsel and the AEDPA
IV. Representation for Indigent Capital Defendants
V. Defense Counsel’s Duty to Investigate and Defend
A. ABA Guidelines: A New Model for Conducting Mitigation Investigations
B. Recent Cases Challenging the Adequacy of Mitigation Defense Work
VI. Attorney-Client Negotiations
VII. In Summary, What Do These Cases Say?
VIII. Conclusion
10