« Noting the focus on prosecutor elections as new front in criminal justice reform efforts | Main | Another sad account of how US Bureau of Prisons administers compassionate release program »

March 7, 2018

"Lethal Rejection: An Empirical Analysis of the Astonishing Plunge in Death Sentences in the United States from Their Post-Furman Peak"

The title of this post is the title of this interesting new paper by David McCord and Talia Roitberg Harmon now available via SSRN. Here is the abstract:

The authors gathered information on 1665 death-eligible cases nationwide for three years at decade intervals: 1994, 2004, and 2014.  In 517 cases death sentences were imposed; in 311 cases sentencers spared the defendants from death sentences, and in 837 cases prosecutors spared defendants from death sentences.  The Article proceeds in three Parts. Part I explains the methodology for unearthing relevant data and preparing it for analysis.  Part II analyzes declines in death sentences due to decreasing death eligibility, that is, fewer murderers over time meeting the criteria that made death a sentencing option.  Four reasons are examined: fewer death-eligible murders, the United States Supreme Court’s exemptions of juveniles who were less than eighteen years of age at the time of the commission of the murder, and persons with intellectual disability (known to the law as the “mentally retarded”); and the abolition of the death penalty in several states.  This Part concludes that about half of the decline in death sentences is attributable to decreased death-eligibility, mostly due to the steep decrease in the number of death-eligible murders.

Part III examines increasingly narrower perceptions of death-worthiness, that is, the evolution in attitudes among prosecutors and sentencers toward deeming fewer among the many death-eligible defendants worthy of death sentences.  This Part requires the most complicated analysis because unlike death-eligibility decisions, which are dictated by law, death-worthiness decisions emerge from an opaque brew of many factors, including, but not limited to, resource differentials among jurisdictions, prosecutorial attitudes, the wishes of the murder victim’s survivors, defense counsel performance, public opinion, and sentencer reactions.  But while death-worthiness decisions are often opaque in individual cases, each case generates empirical data from which patterns may be discerned. Part III uses such data to analyze ten questions and arrive at tentative answers:

• Did the advent of life-without-parole (hereinafter “LWOP”) reduce death sentences in jurisdictions where it was added as an option? (only in Texas)

• Did sentencers become more reluctant to return death sentences? (no)

• Were death sentences decreasingly imposed in less aggravated cases and increasingly imposed in more aggravated cases? (to some extent)

• Did presentation of greater numbers of mitigating factors conduce to fewer death sentences? (no)

• Did robbery during a murder became a less powerful aggravator? (yes)

• Did 18-to-20 year-olds benefit from a ripple effect from the exemption of juveniles? (yes)

• Did death sentences become less common in multiple perpetrator cases? (yes)

• Did low population counties increasingly drop out of death sentencing? (yes)

• Did low revenue counties increasingly drop out of death sentencing? (no) and

• Did a few traditionally high-volume death sentencing counties skew the figures by cutting back on the use of the death penalty due to local political factors? (yes)

March 7, 2018 at 09:18 AM | Permalink


And as death penalties have decreased, so have mass shootings, to the point where we have almost no people put to death or carrying out mass shootings anymore. Once the death penalty is abolished, like in Norway, mass shootings will disappear, just like in Norway.

Posted by: Anders Breivike | Mar 7, 2018 10:17:14 AM

I too have come to oppose the death penalty as it in the US. The reality is that the obstructionists have won. The Supreme Court decided that lawyer jobs would be the main purpose of the death penalty. They fine tuned it to make it rare, delayed, and a massive generator of lawyer employment. I do not support those purposes. So, it should end, and thousands of lawyers will be immediately laid off.

I support the Italian death penalty. This is a highly effective, cheap, and immediate tool of sentencing. Guard waves a carton of cigarettes. The condemned is stabbed multiple times, even in the back. The investigation concludes he committed suicide.

Posted by: David Behar | Mar 7, 2018 12:27:30 PM

David Behar is and idiot and a liar.

Posted by: Claudio Giusti | Mar 7, 2018 12:33:18 PM

Wow! American Death penalty is only for mass shooters ??? Uack, Uack, Uack …

Posted by: Claudio Giusti | Mar 7, 2018 12:35:48 PM

Claudio. I think I saw a study correlating the risk of suicide in Italian prison with violent behavior. They are not just getting rid of their bad killers, they are getting rid of their disruptive and annoying prisoners, who did not commit murder.

Posted by: David Behar | Mar 7, 2018 1:14:07 PM

"The condemned is stabbed multiple times, even in the back. The investigation concludes he committed suicide"
DB is a liar and an idiot.

Posted by: Claudio Giusti | Mar 7, 2018 2:10:06 PM

Claudio: From the University of Cagliani, all liars and idiots, you are saying:


Posted by: David Behar | Mar 7, 2018 3:40:57 PM

"Suicides and Self-harming " suicides, NOT homicides, you idiot.

Posted by: Claudio Giusti | Mar 8, 2018 5:15:04 AM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB