Abstract

 


 



Above the Fray: Supreme Court Should Let Judges Keep a Hand in Who Gets Executed


Stephanos Bibas


University of Pennsylvania Law School


Legal Times, Vol. 25, No. 5, February 4, 2002

Abstract:     
In Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000), the Supreme Court held that any fact that increases a defendant's statutory maximum sentence must be proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. This Term, in Ring v. Arizona, the Court will decide whether to extend Apprendi to ban capital sentencing by judges. This op-ed essay analyzes the Apprendi debate as a clash of the historical ideal of individualized justice by juries versus practical concerns about equality and efficiency. This essay supports the continuation of judicial capital sentencing, as it is a promising tool for combatting racial disparities in the death penalty.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 2

Keywords: Apprendi, Ring, death penalty, capital punishment, race, sentencing, jury, criminal procedure

JEL Classification: K14

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: February 11, 2002  

Suggested Citation

Bibas, Stephanos, Above the Fray: Supreme Court Should Let Judges Keep a Hand in Who Gets Executed. Legal Times, Vol. 25, No. 5, February 4, 2002. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=299438 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.299438

Contact Information

Stephanos Bibas (Contact Author)
University of Pennsylvania Law School ( email )
3501 Sansom Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104
United States
215-746-2297 (Phone)
HOME PAGE: http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/sbibas/
Feedback to SSRN (Beta)


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 831
Downloads: 58
Download Rank: 188,967

© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.375 seconds