NCJ Number
135635
Journal
Arizona Law Review Volume: 32 Issue: 1 Dated: (1990) Pages: 193-210
Date Published
1990
Length
18 pages
Annotation
In efforts to bring their capital punishment statutes within the legal range imposed by Furman v. Georgia, many States permit the death penalty for offenses characterized as heinous, cruel, or depraved. In Maynard v. Cartwright (Maynard II), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Oklahoma Supreme Court's application of its State statute violated the eighth and fourteenth amendments; the court focused on Oklahoma's use of the heinous aggravating circumstance upon which the death penalty was based.
Abstract
Arizona's death penalty law also contains an aggravating circumstance provision; the State's courts have ruled this statute may be read in the disjunctive. This article analyzes the history underlying the Supreme Court guidelines established for constitutionally acceptable applications of aggravating circumstance provisions and focuses on Arizona's death penalty law and the accompanying attempts to limit application of the "heinous" aggravating circumstance. The provisions in Oklahoma and Arizona law are compared to determine the implications of Maynard II for Arizona's capital sentencing scheme. The author supports narrowing Arizona's use of the aggravating circumstance provision to comply with the mandate to channel the discretion of the sentencer. 205 notes