Homepage
New Abolitionist
Case Fact Sheets
Event Calendar
Get Involved!
Related Links
Search

The New Abolitionist
August 2002,Issue 25

Another Step Toward Abolition

Justice Denied For Madison Hobley

Next Convention!

Getting Ready To "Dog" Governor Davis

How Activists Built A Fight That Won

Meet The Death Row 10: Reginald Mahaffey

Highlights Of The Struggle: Chapter Reports

Stephen Bright: "Used Against The Poorest And Most Powerless"

Sacco And Vanzetti

Thanks To Our Summer Intern

Executions Banned For Mentally Retarded

Judges Barred From Overturning Jury Decisions

Voices From Inside:
Death Row Prisoners Speak Out

Thank You For Being Our Voice
Robert Edwards

Let's Turn The Heat Up
Ronnie Kitchen

"I Pray I Will Live To See Him Home"
Rose Thigpen

Don't Believe The Reform Hype
Stanley Howard


Archive Issues of The New Abolitionist

Judges Barred From Overturning Jury Decisions
by Doug Lee

Death penalty abolitionists won an important victory June 24 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that only a jury could decide sentences in capital punishment cases. By a 7-2 decision in Ring v. Arizona, the Court declared sentencing solely by a judge to be a violation of the Sixth Amendment guarantee to a trial by a jury of one’s peers.

This ruling, which only directly affects cases in Arizona, Montana, Idaho, Colorado, and Nebraska, means that judges will no longer be able to override a jury’s decision and impose death when the jury had decided on a lesser sentence. Since judges tend to impose death more often than juries do, this ruling will result in fewer people being sentenced to death. Of more than 160 cases where a judge did impose a death sentence, these death row inmates could receive commutations or resentencing.

The impact of this decision will be felt nationally, bringing more public attention to the errors committed in cases involving the death penalty. Like the recent ruling of the Supreme Court that bans the execution of the mentally ill, the ruling is a stepping-stone towards abolition.

The criminal justice system seems to be bracing itself for a period of critical analysis of the death penalty by offering concessions in an attempt to quell rising sentiment against this flawed system.

Ring v. Arizona seems to be the acknowledgement of a fallible system. In this ruling, the Court overturned Apprendi v. New Jersey, a case that gave judges the authority to lengthen capital punishment sentences in instances of a hate crime. Justices on the bench have responded to pressure placed on them by attempting to restabilize the conditions in which executions can occur, engaging in an action they have always avoided. By overturning a prior ruling, the Supreme Court has essentially admitted to making an error.

With continual pressure, decisions such as Ring v. Arizona will occur; every action by the public will demand a response from the system. Ultimately, activists, such as members of the Campaign to End the Death Penalty, will pave the way towards abolition through the mobilization of a visible movement against capital punishment.

 

The New Abolitionist - August 2002, Issue 25
Campaign To End The Death Penalty, Chicago, IL - www.nodeathpenalty.org


Homepage | New Abolitionist | CEDP Fact Sheets
Event Calendar | Get Involved! | Links | Search