Michael L. Radelet

Racial Characteristics and the Imposition of the Death Penalty.

This paper explores the question of whether death penalty statutes passed after the 1972 Supreme Court decision in Furman v. Georgia successfully eliminate racial disparities in capital cases. Over 600 homicide indictments in twenty Florida counties in 1976 and 1977 were examined, focusing on homicides between strangers (nonprimary homicides). Those accused of murdering whites are more likely to be sentenced to death than those accused of murdering blacks. This trend is due primarily to the higher probability for those accused of murdering whites to be indicted for first degree murder. When controlling for race of the victim, the data do not clearly support the hypothesis that race of the defendant is strongly associated with the probability of a first degree murder indictment or the imposition of the death penalty. (abstract Adapted from Source: American Sociological Review, 1981. Copyright

Families, Prisons, and Men with Death Sentences The Human Impact of Structured Uncertainty

This article examines the impact on family members of the uncertainty surrounding the institutionalization of a loved one. Detailed observations and interviews were conducted with several men sentenced to death in Florida and with their families. The stresses of death row confinement for both the family and inmate are outlined. It is found that the stresses of death row have major consequences for family and friends, with some withdrawing and others reacting with renewed support. These reactions can in turn produce additional tension for the inmate. Conditions that inhibit a familys ability to cope with the situation are also discussed, such as restrictions on families talking with one another in the visiting room and the lack of opportunity to phone their incarcerated member.

The Florida Supreme Court and Death Penalty Appeals

In the 1972 case of Furman v. Georgia,1 the United States Supreme Court narrowly voted to invalidate all death penalty statutes then in existence. While each Justice wrote a separate opinion, the death penalty statutes were criticized repeatedly for allowing unguided discretion. This, it was believed, led to the imposition of death sentences in an arbitrary and capricious manner. Within four years of Furman, thirty-five states had enacted new death penalty statutes. These new statutes were of two general types: those legislating a mandatory death sentence for everyone convicted of a certain crime and those specifying new rules to guide juries and judges in deciding who should receive a death sentence. Five of the new statutes were reviewed by the United States Supreme Court in 1976. The Court held that mandatory capital punishment statutes were unconstitutional,2 but it upheld those containing guided discretion provisions.3 The history and content of these decisions have received detailed analysis elsewhere.4

Physician assistants in primary care. Patient assignment and task delegation.

This paper reports a concurrent self-report study of 2,456 office encounters with physicians and/or physician assistants (PAs) in 16 primary care, private practices in Florida. Initial patient assignment to either a physician or PA varies according to demographic and visit-specific characteristics. Patients who are male, younger than 65 years, new patients, seeking help for acute problems, and those who are “walk-in” or “work-in” patients are more likely to be assigned to a PA. Among frequently performed procedures, physicians are more likely to perform the partial histories, partial physicals, and pelvic examinations, as well as counsel patients on diet and psychosocial problems. PAs are more likely to perform the complete physical examinations, record vital signs, conduct diagnostic tests, and perform therapeutic procedures (administer injections, change dressings, etc.). Most tasks performed by PAs receive supervision through chart review raiher than direct oversight. The typical patient visit in a practice employing a PA involves the receipt of services from only one provider. Approximately 50% of patient services are performed by physicians only, while 35% of the services are performed solely by PAs, and 15% are performed by both. Most patients have received care from both the physician and the PA.

Executing the mentally ill : the criminal justice system and the case of Alvin Ford

Drawing the Lines Who Lives and Who Dies? An Introduction to Alvin Ford Family Background, the Crime, and Trial 1953-1974 Anticipating and Enduring the First Death Warrant 1975-1981 Psychological Deterioration and the Road to the Supreme Court 1982-1986 Physicians, Mental Health Professionals, and the Death Penalty Alvin Ford and the Courts Additional Issues Competence for Execution The Supreme Court Speaks Back to Federal Court The 1988 Hearing and Beyond The Cure That Kills

From the Field: THE GROWING SIGNIFICANCE OF PUBLIC OPINION FOR DEATH PENALTY JURISPRUDENCE

ABSTRACT After examining historical interpretations of the eighth amendments ban on cruel and unusual punishments, this paper focuses on recent changes in death penalty attitudes in the United States. Recent decisions by the Supreme Court are discussed that appear to broaden and strengthen the role ofpublic opinion in determining the constitutionality of various aspects of capital punishment. At the same time, several recent public opinion polls document declining support for the death penalty, and find only minority support given the option of life-without-parole (an alternative already available in 35 of the 38 death penalty states in the U.S.). Should these trends continue, the Supreme Court may be receptive to broader challenges to the constitutionality of all death penalty statutes.

Capital Punishment: On botched executions

Introduction On 21 February 1930, convicted murderer Eva Dugan, 52, was hanged from the gallows of the Arizona State Prison in Florence, Arizona. Witnesses were repulsed when Dugan sprang through the trap door on the gallows with such force that her head snapped off and rolled into a corner of the room. Public outcry over the botched execution was so loud that within four years the Arizona legislature abolished hanging and replaced it with a more ‘humane’ way of killing: the gas chamber. Six decades later, the public and policy makers admitted that death by asphyxiation had its own problems. In April 1992, the Arizona gas chamber was mothballed after a horrifying spectacle during the gassing of death row inmate Donald Eugene Harding. Witnesses were sickened by the execution, calling it ‘violent’ and ‘ugly’, and reported that Harding was in great pain before his death mercifully came. Consequently, Hardings was the last mandated asphyxiation in Arizona. In November 1992, Arizona voters passed a ballot initiative that gave prisoners then on its death row a choice between gas and lethal injection and authorised lethal injection as the only means of execution for those sentenced to death thereafter. One might think that in the United States, where technology exists to send astronauts to the moon with perfection, we should be able to shoot people to the hereafter with similar precision.

Parole Interviews of Sex Offenders: The Role of Impression Management

This study investigates the role of impression management in parole interviews and the question of how parole boards interpret what they see as managed impressions. Observations were made of 166 male sex offenders in 236 parole interviews, and detailed interviews were conducted with parole board members. The results indicate that although parole board members believe impression management occurs in all parole interviews, the issue of the veracity of the candidates in presenting themselves rarely arises. Instead, the candidates self-presentation is most often interpreted as a reflection of his self-conception, which may or may not correspond with the boards construction of the candidates “true” self. Furthermore, rather than routinely dismissing impression management as a deceptive camouflage that obstructs accurate appraisals of the candidates future behavior, in some cases the board sees the ability to develop competent impression management skills as a positive asset to have in adjusting to the outside community, and therefore actually encourages some candidates to develop their impression management skills further.

Book Review: The birth of American law: An Italian philosopher and the American Revolution

about their legal careers. The modern group was also more likely to have expectations that were not met—disappointment with salary, dissatisfied with sexist conditions, and so on. Drawing on previous studies of lawyers’ satisfaction, Kitzerow tries to make sense of the concept of career satisfaction and the paradox of the contented woman lawyer. Kitzerow found three patterns in how her respondents dealt with ‘‘Balancing Work and Family’’ (Chapter 6). First, 23% of the women (more so in the pioneer group than the transition and modern groups) did not have children. Second, some respondents worked part-time or took off long periods of time to look after their children. Again integrating previous studies in her analysis, Kitzerow identifies some of the problems with part-time work—for example, the arrangement often ends up with women working full time for part-time pay. The third pattern was to use childcare (often live-in help) and to continuing working full time—in some cases trying to ‘‘work like a man.’’ Nevertheless, women who combined work and children often ended up strained, both physically and mentally. Chapter 7 examines the respondent’s thoughts on how gender impacted their decisions and career. The majority (62% of the pioneer group, 69% of the transition group, and 78% of the modern group) said they would have been treated differently if they were men. Most of them also believed that gender still matters in the legal profession. Although the 2011 focus group of law students thought that law schools were now more egalitarian, many anticipated problems with integrating family and work. In Chapter 8, ‘‘High Hopes, Mixed Outcomes,’’ Kitzerow examines the link between family and work and women’s progress or lack thereof in the legal profession. She examines other studies on why gender equality has stalled and become a ‘‘no-problem’’ despite data to the contrary. As solutions become available, new ideologies (e.g., hyper competitiveness and competitive stereotypes) arise. There is little doubt that one’s gender still plays a role in the legal profession. I would highly recommend this book for prelaw students, law students, lawyers, judges, policy makers, and legislators. It is filled with thoughtful comments from both Kitzerow and her respondents, and provides a well-crafted integration of the literature on women in the legal profession. Much of Kitzerow’s commentary is also relevant to other professions where women are still disadvantaged by a male-dominated culture.

Book Review: Bohm, R. M. (Ed.). (2008). The Death Penalty Today. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis Group. xvi, 224 pp

regarding the scientific case against the forensic use of hypnotic memory retrieval (p. 210) and polygraph examinations (p. 203). Historical awareness is a major strength of the work, but some passages here can feel incomplete as well. Neither slave patrols nor Southern lynch law are discussed as premodern forms of policing, and the historical role of the military in domestic affairs is largely unaddressed. The repressive functions of 19th-century private forces and early public forces are generally understated—the occasional brutality, where discussed (p. 20), can be lacking in context. Episodes sparking crises of legitimacy in modern times are recognized but largely unexplored, as in reference to (p. 32) and photographs of (p. 295) the police riot at the 1968 Democratic Convention minus any account of that event. Certain trends (e.g., militarization, Compstat’s influence) apparently contrary to COPPS principles, and suggestive of a revival of the crime fighter model, are seemingly acknowledged only obliquely in the final chapter of the work (p. 451). Still, there is easily more that is worthwhile in this work for preprofessional and academic audiences alike. Although not explicitly called out by the author, two poignant and related themes seem to thread the text together from the foreword to its conclusion. First, that as a marginalized and often underappreciated profession, the police are given to occupational frustrations that are poisonous to quality performance and the private lives of officers. Second, that American policing nonetheless hinges on perceived legitimacy—and thus, a healthy and professional force. This dilemma might be definitive of the challenge facing policing today, and it would seem that COPPS, as envisioned here, offers something potentially quite valuable toward its resolution.