Add to ORKGIn Furman v. Georgia, the United States Supreme Court held that it was unconstitutional to administer the death penalty upon the sole, unguided discretion of juries. In response to Furman, some states amended their statutes to suggest or require that a jury assess the defendant\u27s future dangerousness before issuing a death sentence. Generally, this assessment is based on psychiatric expert testimony. This author explores the reliability and accuracy of psychiatric expert testimony of future dangerousness in light of the Court\u27s more recent Barefoot v. Estelle and Dauber, v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals decisions. The author argues that because the death penalty is so extreme and utterly final, heightened standards of reliability and ac...
In 1972, in Furman v. Georgia, the Supreme Court deemed it incontestable that a death sentence is ...
In five decisions handed down on July 2, 1976, the United States Supreme Court held that the death p...
Civil commitment, confinement under sexual predator laws, and many capital and noncapital sentences ...
In Furman v. Georgia, the United States Supreme Court held that it was unconstitutional to administe...
The U.S. Supreme Court, in Furman v. Georgia (1972), held that the death penalty is constitutional o...
The United States Supreme Court has long held that the death penalty cannot be imposed arbitrarily, ...
This Article reviews the use of mental health experts to provide testimony on the future dangerousne...
To understand the Barefoot decision, it is necessary to examine Jurek v. Texas, an earlier case in w...
Forty jurisdictions sanction capital punishment. However, public opinion polls of support for the de...
This Note concerns the past and present of the Texas death penalty\u27s future dangerousness stand...
In recent years, the U.S. Supreme Court has created two categorical exemptions to the death penalty....
In 1972, in Furman v. Georgia, the Supreme Court deemed it “incon-testable” that a death sentence is...
A fatal mistake. A defendant is sentenced to die because the jury was misinformed about the law. The...
In 1972, in Furman v. Georgia, the Supreme Court deemed it incontestable that a death sentence is ...
In five decisions handed down on July 2, 1976, the United States Supreme Court held that the death p...
Civil commitment, confinement under sexual predator laws, and many capital and noncapital sentences ...
In Furman v. Georgia, the United States Supreme Court held that it was unconstitutional to administe...
The U.S. Supreme Court, in Furman v. Georgia (1972), held that the death penalty is constitutional o...
The United States Supreme Court has long held that the death penalty cannot be imposed arbitrarily, ...
This Article reviews the use of mental health experts to provide testimony on the future dangerousne...
To understand the Barefoot decision, it is necessary to examine Jurek v. Texas, an earlier case in w...
Forty jurisdictions sanction capital punishment. However, public opinion polls of support for the de...
This Note concerns the past and present of the Texas death penalty\u27s future dangerousness stand...
In recent years, the U.S. Supreme Court has created two categorical exemptions to the death penalty....
In 1972, in Furman v. Georgia, the Supreme Court deemed it “incon-testable” that a death sentence is...
A fatal mistake. A defendant is sentenced to die because the jury was misinformed about the law. The...
In 1972, in Furman v. Georgia, the Supreme Court deemed it incontestable that a death sentence is ...
In five decisions handed down on July 2, 1976, the United States Supreme Court held that the death p...
Civil commitment, confinement under sexual predator laws, and many capital and noncapital sentences ...