Tinkering with the machinery in capital cases

Article Abstract:

The Supreme Court did little to change existing law concerning capital punishment during its 1992-93 term, though it did hear 12 cases involving death row inmates. They were in favor of the government in 9 of these cases, and favored the inmate in the other three. On the surface, the court's actions seemed to be aimed at making it harder for inmates to gain appellate hearings, which would surprise no one familiar with the court's pro-capital punishment beliefs. Most cases dealt with habeas corpus issues.

Analysis, Appellate procedure, Appeals (Law)

---

Can justice be served by appeals of the dead?

Article Abstract:

The US Supreme Court grants certiorari in a case which four justices think merits consideration; however, a stay of execution requires five votes, so the benefits of the Rule of Four may come too late to do a criminal defendant any good. There is no reason to give death row inmates more restricted access to the Supreme Court than any other group, and the court should have a rule giving automatic stays of execution to death row inmates whose cases have been granted certiorari.

Practice, Stays of execution, proceedings, etc., Stays (Law)

---

The First Amendment also applies to lawyers

Article Abstract:

Restrictions on the First Amendment rights of lawyers speaking about pending court proceedings are unjustifiable and constitutionally inconsistent, as well as contrary to democracy. In Gentile v State Bar of NV, the Chief Justice's majority upheld court-imposed restrictions on lawyer speech because such speech carries particular weight. However, the First Amendment does not apply only to unpersuasive speech.

United States, Attorneys, Lawyers, Freedom of speech, Behavior

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: Aggravation and mitigation in capital cases: what do jurors think? Free exercise rights of capital jurors
• Abstracts: Child abuse as slavery: a Thirteenth Amendment response to DeShaney. The case of the missing amendments: R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul
• Abstracts: Reinventing the regulatory state. Behavioral analysis of law. Free speech now
• Abstracts: Applying the uniform capitalization rules to oil and gas properties. Oil and gas investments: the depletion tax preference controversy
• Abstracts: 60 minutes with the Honorable James F. Rill, assistant attorney general, Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.