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: 135635 Find in a Library
Title: Maynard v. Cartwright: Channeling Arizona's Use of the Heinous, Cruel, or Depraved Aggravating Circumstance To Impose the Death Penalty
Journal: Arizona Law Review  Volume:32  Issue:1  Dated:(1990)  Pages:193-210
Author(s): T Pollman
Date Published: 1990
Page Count: 18
Type: Survey
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
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
Main Term(s): Capital punishment; Cruel and unusual punishment
Index Term(s): Arizona; Oklahoma; US Supreme Court decisions
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=135635

*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.