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: 141969 Find in a Library
Title: Justice Douglas and the Death Penalty: A Demanding View of Due Process
Journal: American Journal of Criminal Law  Volume:20  Issue:1  Dated:(Fall 1992)  Pages:135-161
Author(s): S Smith
Date Published: 1992
Page Count: 27
Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This analysis of the evolution of the opinions of Justice William O. Douglas concerning capital punishment concludes that the changes in Douglas's views did not reflect inconsistency; instead, he focused increasingly on the process that led to such a severe punishment.
Abstract: Close examination of Douglas's opinions reveals that Douglas did not view a death penalty as inherently unconstitutional. However, he viewed the process leading to the imposition of capital punishment as highly suspect. Thus, as the issues moved away from focusing on the punishment itself and toward focusing on the process by which it was imposed, Douglas moved from voting to uphold convictions to voting to reverse them. Douglas did not so much desire the reversal of a death sentence as much as he valued an unwavering and demanding procedure to ensure that the most severe of sentences were not meted out unfairly. His handling of the death penalty was similar in many ways to his handling of all criminal cases in that he applied a demanding standard whenever a person's liberty was at issue. Thus, he focused intensely on the constitutional guarantees of due process and equal protection and the guarantee against cruel and unusual punishment. Although it is not clear how he would have voted on subsequent cases, his approach to capital punishment clearly differed from that of Justices Brennan and Marshall and seems closer to those of Stewart and White in Furman. Footnotes (Author summary modified)
Main Term(s): Capital punishment; US Supreme Court decisions
Index Term(s): Cruel and unusual punishment; Equal Protection; Legal doctrines; Right to Due Process
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=141969

*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.