Case Histories - Quantitative Methods for Judging the Comparative Excessiveness of Death Sentences (From Use/Nonuse/Misuse of Applied Social Research in the Courts, 1980, P 82-94, Michael J Saks and Charles H Baron, ed. - See NCJ-75219)

• NCJ Number: 75227
• Author(s): D C Baldus
• Date Published: 1980
• Length: 13 pages
• Sale Source: Abt Books
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

The tools of applied social science can be used to study procedural reforms, such as reducing excessiveness in capital sentencing.

Abstract

Currently, the courts, primarily appellate courts, treat excessiveness in determining the death sentence in murder cases in an intuitive and unsystematic manner. Excessiveness as used here means the probability that a defendant would not receive a death sentence in a similar situation elsewhere. The legal support for such a claim may be the eighth amendment, and to date the courts have not specified the level of probability at which a defendant's death penalty becomes excessive. Applied social science was used to analyze excessiveness in capital sentences from a study of 239 murder convictions given by California juries from 1958 to 1966. Three quantitative measures of excessiveness were developed: the salient features measure and two main determinants measures. A discussion of six principles in the construction of the quantitative measures is given. It is recommended that quantitative arguments in an excessiveness review proceeding establish a threshold and perform a burden-shifting function. If the numbers in the aggregate suggest that the defendants receive a death sentence less than a certain percentage of the time (i.e., 50 percent), then the burden of proof on the excessiveness issue should shift to the State. Tabular data are included.