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: 41240 Find in a Library
Title: RESURRECTION OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT - THE 1976 DEATH PENALTY CASES
Journal: DICKINSON LAW REVIEW  Volume:81  Issue:3  Dated:(SPRING 1977)  Pages:543-573
Author(s): M D RHOADS
Corporate Author: Dickinson School of Law
United States of America
Date Published: 1977
Page Count: 21
Sponsoring Agency: Dickinson School of Law
Carlisle, PA 17013
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: REVIEW OF FIVE U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISIONS DEALING WITH THE DEATH PENALTY WHICH WERE HANDED DOWN DURING THE 1976 TERM, FOCUSING ON THE WAYS IN WHICH QUESTIONS LEFT OPEN IN FURMAN V GEORGIA (1972) WERE ANSWERED BY THEM.
Abstract: IN FURMAN, THE COURT HELD THAT CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AS THEN ADMINISTERED WAS CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT. THIS LEFT OPEN QUESTIONS OF WHETHER OR NOT THE DEATH PENALTY WAS CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT PER SE; WHETHER THE EXISTENCE OF NONSENTENCING DISCRETION MAKES ADMINISTRATION OF THE DEATH PENALTY UNCONSTITUTIONALLY ARBITRARY; AND WHETHER STATUTES PROVIDING STANDARDS FOR IMPOSING THE DEATH PENALTY OR MAKING IT MANDATORY ARE CONSTITUTIONAL. IN THIS ARTICLE, THE 1976 DECISIONS IN GREGG V GEORGIA, PROFITT V FLORIDA, JUREK V TEXAS, WOODSON V NORTH CAROLINA, AND ROBERTS V LOUISIANA, WHICH HAD THE EFFECTS OF UPHOLDING THE DEATH PENALTY STATUTES IN GA., FLA., AND TEXAS WHILE STRIKING DOWN THOSE OF NORTH CAROLINA AND LOUISIANA, ARE EXAMINED. THE AUTHOR ANALYZES THE COURT'S EIGHTH AMENDMENT RATIONALE AS WELL AS HOW THE UNRESOLVED QUESTIONS OF FURMAN WERE ADDRESSED. THIS ANALYSIS IS THEN APPLIED TO EVALUATE THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF PENNSYLVANIA'S POST-FURMAN CAPITAL PUNISHMENT STATUTE.(AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)...EB
Index Term(s): Capital punishment; Comparative analysis; Cruel and unusual punishment; Judicial decisions; Pennsylvania; State laws; US Supreme Court
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=41240

*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.