Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The death penalty is sought in only a fraction of murder cases, and it is often doled out capriciously. The National Academy of Sciences concludes that its role as a deterrent is ambiguous.
War crime. v. t. e. Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty and formerly called judicial homicide, [ 1 ][ 2 ] is the state-sanctioned killing of a person as punishment for actual or supposed misconduct. [ 3 ] The sentence ordering that an offender be punished in such a manner is known as a death sentence, and the act of carrying out ...
Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005), is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held that it is unconstitutional to impose capital punishment for crimes committed while under the age of 18. [1] The 5–4 decision overruled Stanford v. Kentucky, in which the court had upheld execution of offenders at or ...
McCoy v. Louisiana, 584 U.S. 414 (2018), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held the Sixth Amendment guarantees a defendant the right to decide that the objective of his defense is to maintain innocence at all costs, even when counsel believes that admitting guilt offers the defendant the best chance to avoid the death penalty.
Anti-death penalty reverend fights for Emmanuel Littlejohn Littlejohn has been at the center of a clemency campaign led by the Rev. Jeff Hood , anti-death penalty activist who has witnessed seven ...
The overwhelming weight of the evidence points to the conclusion that Williams is the victim of a serious miscarriage of justice, for which he has been sentenced to death. ... pro-death-penalty ...
Oregon v. Guzek, 546 U.S. 517 (2006) – States may limit the evidence of innocence a defendant may present at his sentencing hearing to evidence already presented at his trial. Kansas v. Marsh, 548 U.S. 163 (2006) – Imposing the death penalty when mitigating and aggravating factors are in equipoise is constitutional. Kansas v.
Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808 (1991), was a United States Supreme Court case authored by Chief Justice William Rehnquist which held that testimony in the form of a victim impact statement is admissible during the sentencing phase of a trial and, in death penalty cases, does not violate the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause of the Eighth Amendment. [1]