skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 10687 Find in a Library
Title: DECLARING THE DEATH PENALTY UNCONSTITUTIONAL (FROM CRIMINAL LAW - ESSAYS ON CRIMINAL LAW SELECTED FROM THE PAGES OF THE HARVARD LAW REVIEW, 1972 - SEE NCJ08880)
Author(s): A J GOLDBERG; A M DERSHOWITZ
Corporate Author: Harvard Law Review Assoc
Harvard Law Review
United States of America
Date Published: 1970
Page Count: 33
Sponsoring Agency: Harvard Law Review Assoc
Cambridge, MA 02138
Publication Number: U
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: SUPREME COURT TREATMENT OF CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT CASES IS ANALYZED, AND IT IS SUGGESTED THAT THE COURT DECLARE CAPITAL PUNISHMENT UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Abstract: THIS 1970 ARTICLE, WHICH WAS WRITTEN BY THE FORMER SUPREME COURT JUSTICE AND A HARVARD LAW PROFESSOR, PREDATES THE HISTORIC SUPREME COURT DECISION IN FURMAN V. GEORGIA, IN WHICH THE DEATH PENALTY WAS DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE OF INEQUALITIES IN SENTENCING. THIS ARGUMENT CALLS FOR THE COMPLETE AND UNQUALIFIED ABOLITION OF THE DEATH PENALTY AS A CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT. PRECEDENTS ON CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT ARE EXAMINED, AND IT SUGGESTED THAT CAPITAL PUNISHMENT VIOLATES SEVERAL EIGHTH AMENDMENT TESTS OF CONSTITUTIONALITY - THE EVOLVING STANDARDS OF DECENCY, EXTREME AND DEGRADING SEVERITY, IRREGULARITY IN THE IMPOSITION OF THE PUNISHMENT, AND EXCESSIVE SEVERITY. SEVERAL ARGUMENTS ADVOCATING SUPREME COURT AVOIDANCE OF THE ISSUE ON PROCEDURAL GROUNDS ARE EXPLAINED AND ALL OF THEM ARE REJECTED.
Index Term(s): Capital punishment; Constitutional Rights/Civil Liberties; Cruel and unusual punishment; Judicial decisions; Sentencing/Sanctions; US Supreme Court
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=10687

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.