NCJ Number
174519
Journal
Seton Hall Law Review Volume: 29 Issue: 1 Dated: 1998 Pages: 147-212
Date Published
1998
Length
66 pages
Annotation
This article examines the question of whether an inordinate stay on death row between a death sentence and execution constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
Abstract
The article outlines the modern law of death eligibility under the Eighth Amendment. In non-capital cases, under a different variant of its Eighth Amendment jurisprudence, the Court has ruled that the collateral consequences of an inmate's confinement may violate the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause of the Eighth Amendment. These same strictures should apply in capital cases. The article also notes the relative infrequency of executions in light of the number of capital convictions and discusses capital cases in which the defendant asserted that the state forfeited the right to execute him, because of the delay between the imposition of the death sentence and the proposed execution date. It addresses the inordinate delay claim in light of the factors that the Court has outlined since 1976 to define the law of death eligibility, and reviews contemporary legislative attitudes, response of juries, penological objectives, and international law on inordinate delay in capital cases. The article concludes that, in certain circumstances, an execution after an inordinate delay between a death sentence and execution may constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Notes