An argument advocating reform in the appellate process of U.S. capital cases
Abstract
The U.S. appellate system in capital cases provides the convicted with a large number of appeals in order to ensure that an innocent person is not executed. The current manifestation of this system follows the paradigm established in the landmark 1976 case, Gregg v. Georgia. In this work, I propose a definition for inefficiency in appellate systems, and I explain the Gregg protocol in light of that definition. The history of the death penalty is emphasized to establish a transition to and to contrast instances of efficiency, or lack thereof, before, the current procedure was established. The protections installed by Gregg are dissected with regard to evaluating efficiency. Subsequent Supreme Court opinions are scrutinized to examine which reforms were implemented. The costs of inefficiency, both financial and legal, are inspected to determine whether a potential lack of efficiency warrants substantial reforms to the appellate system. Results indicate that the Gregg system does meet the definition of inefficiency, and that reforms could benefit the process. Recommendation for reforms, with the qualifier that this research was done with the primary purpose of evaluating efficiency, despite the obvious presence of numerous other methods of appraisal.
Notes
This item is only available in print in the UCF Libraries. If this is your thesis or dissertation, you can help us make it available online for use by researchers around the world by STARS for more information.
Thesis Completion
2000
Semester
Spring
Advisor
Handberg, Roger
Degree
Bachelor of Arts (B.A.)
College
College of Arts and Sciences
Degree Program
Political Science
Subjects
Arts and Sciences -- Dissertations, Academic;Dissertations, Academic -- Arts and Sciences;Appellate procedure -- United States;Capital punishment -- United States
Format
Identifier
DP0021587
Language
English
Access Status
Open Access
Length of Campus-only Access
None
Document Type
Honors in the Major Thesis
Recommended Citation
Law, William L., "An argument advocating reform in the appellate process of U.S. capital cases" (2000). HIM 1990-2015. 190.
https://stars.library.ucf.edu/honorstheses1990-2015/190