skip to main content
Idioma:
Tipo de recurso Mostra resultados com: Mostra resultados com: Índice

LEADING CASES: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: Criminal Law and Procedure: Eighth Amendment - Death Penalty - Weighing of Aggravating and Mitigating Factors: Kansas vs. Marsh

Harvard law review, 2006-11, Vol.120 (1), p.144 [Periódico revisado por pares]

Cambridge: Harvard Law Review Association

Texto completo disponível

Citações Citado por
  • Título:
    LEADING CASES: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: Criminal Law and Procedure: Eighth Amendment - Death Penalty - Weighing of Aggravating and Mitigating Factors: Kansas vs. Marsh
  • Assuntos: Capital punishment ; Constitutional amendments ; Criminal law ; Criminal sentences ; Murders & murder attempts ; Studies ; Supreme Court decisions
  • É parte de: Harvard law review, 2006-11, Vol.120 (1), p.144
  • Descrição: The Supreme Court's death penalty jurisprudence demonstrates a notorious lack of clarity and frustrates state legislatures that seek to devise constitutionally valid capital punishment laws. While scholars argue that the Court should take steps to simplify this doctrine, heedlessly clinging to the letter of the law without adhering to the spirit might engender more problems than it solves. Last term, in Kansas v. Marsh, the Supreme Court maintained that its precedent involves two simple requirements on any death penalty regime: 1. the narrowing of the class of offenders, and 2. the admission of mitigating evidence. Although such a straightforward framework seems to leave states free to devise innovative capital punishment laws, Marsh contravenes the requirement of reasoned and individualized sentencing determination by ignoring the moral directive that like defendants should be treated alike.
  • Editor: Cambridge: Harvard Law Review Association
  • Idioma: Inglês
Voltar para lista de resultados

  • Realização: ABCD-USP USP   Logos de Redes Sociais: Freepik

Buscando em bases de dados remotas. Favor aguardar.