The Limits of Legal Language: Decisionmaking in Capital Cases

It is argued that current sentencing instructions could be improved by focusing on more narrow, achievable goals and by adopting an approach to capital sentencing that differs significantly from that in Furman vs. Georgia (1972). Proposed model instructions seek to limit the class of the death eligi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Michigan law review 1996-08, Vol.94 (8), p.2590-2624
1. Verfasser: Steiker, Jordan M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:It is argued that current sentencing instructions could be improved by focusing on more narrow, achievable goals and by adopting an approach to capital sentencing that differs significantly from that in Furman vs. Georgia (1972). Proposed model instructions seek to limit the class of the death eligible and at the same time seek to communicate to sentencers in clear terms the nature and scope of their decisionmaking power. The instructions seek to correct 2 central respective failings of the pre- and post-Furman paradigms. The "standardless discretion" approach embodied in the pre-Furman statutes offers no protection to those defendants who are not truly among the "worst" offenders. The "guided discretion" approach reflected in contemporary statutes structures the death penalty decision in ways that are unhelpful and misleading, thereby undermining sentencer accountability.
ISSN:0026-2234
1939-8557
DOI:10.2307/1289834