1984 Oregon Death Penalty Initiatives - A State Constitutional Analysis

• NCJ Number: 104296
• Journal: Willamette Law Review Volume: 22 Issue: 2 and 3 Dated: (Summer 1986) Pages: 285-353
• Author(s): K H Waldo
• Date Published: 1986
• Length: 70 pages
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/; NCJRS Photocopy Services
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This article discusses why the Oregon voters' 1984 adoption of the death penalty for aggravated murder cannot withstand a challenge under the State constitution.

Abstract

The 1984 provisions rely upon the Texas capital sentencing law approved by the U.S. Supreme Court in Jurek v. Texas (1976). The provisions, however, do not comply with the State constitution even though they may conform with U.S. Supreme Court constitutional mandates. The 1984 Oregon proposals provide a constitutional amendment that excludes the execution of the death penalty from being per se cruel and unusual punishment. The provisions do not, however, address State constitutional mandates that the sentencing process ensure individualized sentencing proportionate to the severity of the crime. The 1984 proposals probably fall short of even Federal constitutional standards, since they do not incorporate Federal post-Jurek case law mandating individualized sentencing. Also, the vagueness in the special jury queries of the provisions violates State constitutional mandates. Finally, the 1984 provisions do not comply with State constitutional requirements for meaningful appellate review of the death sentence. 319 footnotes.