Tinkering with the machinery of death: An analysis of the impact of legislative reform on the sentencing of capital murderers in Texas

Journal of Criminal Justice

Volumn 28, Issue 5, 2000, Pages 343-349

  Brock, Deon E ^a   Sorensen, Jon ^b   Marquart, James W ^c  

^a Fort Hayes State University   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS PAN AMERICAN   (United States)

^c SAM HOUSTON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Death penalty; Juries; Legal reform; Sentencing; Texas

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034259347     PISSN: 00472352     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0047-2352(00)00050-7     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Black C.L. Due process for death: Jurek v. Texas and companion cases. Cathol Univ Law Rev. 26:1976;1-16.
2. Bowers W.J., Steiner B. Death by default: an empirical demonstration of false and forced choices in capital sentencing. Tex Law Rev. 77:1999;606-717.
3. Conrad C.S. Jury Nullification: The Evolution of a Doctrine. 1998;Carolina Academic Press, Durham.
4. Costanzo S., Costanzo M. Life or death decisions: an analysis of capital jury decision making under the special issues sentencing framework. Law Hum Behav. 18:1994;151-170.
5. Eisenberg T., Wells M.T. Deadly confusion: juror instructions in capital cases. Cornell Law Rev. 79:1993;1-17.
6. Frank J., Applegate B.K. Assessing juror understanding of capital-sentencing instructions. Crime Delinquency. 44:1998;412-433.
7. Haney C.L., Lynch M. Clarifying life and death matters: an analysis of instructional comprehension and penalty phase closing arguments. Law Hum Behav. 21:1997;575-595.
8. Haney C.L., Sontag L., Costanzo S. Deciding to take a life: capital juries, sentencing instructions, and the jurisprudence of death. J Soc Issues. 50:1994;149-176.
9. Sicola M.K., Shreves R.R. Jury considerations of mitigating evidence: a renewed challenge to the constitutionality of the Texas death penalty statute. Am J Crim Law. 15:1988;55-68.
10. Sorensen J., Marquart J. Future dangerousness and incapacitation. Acker J.R., Bohm R.M., Lanier C.S. American's Experiment with Capital Punishment: Reflections on the Past, Present, and Future of the Ultimate Penal Sanction. 1998;183-200 Carolina Academic Press, Durham.
11. Steiker C., Steiker J. Judicial developments in capital punishment law. Acker J.R., Bohm R.M., Lanier C.S. American's Experiment with Capital Punishment: Reflections on the Past, Present, and Future of the Ultimate Penal Sanction. 1998;47-76 Carolina Academic Press, Durham.
12. Tobolowski P.M. What hath Penry wrought? Mitigating circumstances and the Texas death penalty. Am J Crim Law. 19:1992;346-394 Cases Cited.
13. Callins v. Collins, 114 S.Ct. 1127 (1994).
14. Eddings v. Oklahoma, 455 U.S. 104 (1982).
15. Franklin v. Lynaugh, 487 U.S. 164 (1988).
16. Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972).
17. Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976).
18. Jurek v. State, 522 S.W.2d. 934 (1975).
19. Jurek v. Texas, 428 U.S. 262 (1976).
20. Lockett v. Ohio, 438 U.S. 586 (1978).
21. Penry v. Lynaugh, 492 U.S. 937 (1989).
22. Proffitt v. Florida, 428 U.S. 242 (1976).