Death Penalty of U Essay Example

far exceed billions of dollars which could be utilized for other purposes. Administering the death penalty in California involves a lengthy process that requires significant funds from taxpayers. This situation has been influenced by misleading information through the voter initiative process, leading voters to accept and support an inefficient and ineffective system for delivering timely justice. Research conducted by the legislative analyst's office reveals incomplete records of crimes eligible for the death penalty between 1978 and 2000. Despite enacting strict laws through voter initiatives in California, inadequate funding and poor utilization hinder their implementation resulting in wasteful use of taxpayer money and a backlog of cases. It is crucial for the legislature to implement corrective measures to reduce the backlog and address this pressing issue. Civic education plays a vital role in informing the electorate about challenges within this sector.
Swift implementation of meaningful reforms is crucial to prevent wasteful spending on the defunct death penalty system. These reforms aim to establish a fair and transparent system, but they may not be favored by the electorate due to increased taxation requirements. Alternatively, replacing the death penalty with life imprisonment without parole could address this issue. Attention must also be given to the unresolved racial disparities in the federal death penalty system, particularly concerning black defendants. Scrutiny has been placed on examining the racial composition of juries and establishing fair and unbiased juries that consider the specific impact of the death penalty. It is important to prioritize upholding democratic values and historical conceptions by developing a process similar to Batson that eliminates race as an influencing factor in determining whether a case becomes federal or not (Connor,

n.d.). In states where the death penalty is not legal, typically the federal death penalty is used to impose death sentences on defendants according to the constitution. As a result, state prosecutors must utilize alternative sentencing options instead of capital punishment which unfortunately hampers progress in administering it. The fact that some states can establish and enforce their own criminal justice policies within their jurisdictions, contrary to the requirement for collaboration among all states as stated in the constitution, is unfortunate.The limitations imposed by the sixth amendment and equal protection constitutional doctrines in cases involving dual jurisdiction and capital punishment are evident, according to Connor (n.d.). These limitations highlight the challenges faced in criminal justice policies established by Congress due to its characteristics as an institution. Many states have reconsidered their use of capital punishment due to economic difficulties, but the federal government does not take into account incurred costs, making it unlikely to discuss capital punishment. In states allowing capital punishment, prosecutors handle capital trials and seek the death penalty. However, this approach has been criticized for its arbitrariness and inefficiency. The administration of the death penalty requires significant funding and experienced prosecutors, resulting in a lengthy and complex process. Therefore, limited budgets and knowledge lead to geographical disparities in prosecuting serious crimes within states. Possessing institutional knowledge is crucial for professionals dealing with such cases to prevent them from being overturned due to mishandling or prosecutorial misconduct. Nevertheless, reevaluating death penalty cases only adds more expenses due to the lengthy review process. The ineffectiveness of the death penalty system is particularly evident at the county level.

Note: The were not included in thisas

they are not relevant without specific context or purpose specified.To address the issue, some propose transferring the death penalty process from counties to the state level. This would involve a specialized group of professionals and lawyers who exclusively handle capital cases. The aim of this proposal is to tackle challenges related to dignity in these cases, an important concept recognized by US Supreme Court justices. There are differing viewpoints regarding the relationship between capital punishment and human dignity. Georgia (1972) argues that capital punishment cannot coexist harmoniously and constitutionally with inherent human dignity, while Simmons (2005) believes that a regulated death penalty does not compromise human dignity. Internationally, there have been varied reactions towards the death penalty, leading to its abolition in countries like Canada and European Union member nations (Knowles, H., n.d.). Many countries have abolished the death penalty due to its irreversible nature and the difficulty in correcting errors (M.C.A.De Ungria et al., 2008). Convictions based on testimonial evidence rather than more reliable post-conviction evidence such as DNA often make it challenging to overturn death sentences.Advancements in DNA technology and a shift towards life sentences without parole have led to a global decrease in death sentences. The imposition of the death penalty is often influenced by perceived societal danger, and despite its drawbacks, public support has prevented its complete abolition in the US criminal justice system. Focus groups were formed to explore diverse opinions on this matter, revealing varying views among people in the United States regarding capital punishment. While studies primarily focus on the US, many countries still practice the death penalty. Concerns about wrongful convictions and innocent individuals being sentenced to

death are widespread; however, a majority of Americans believe that capital punishment serves as an effective deterrent. In contrast, opposing nations such as China and Japan cite the cruelty of executions as their main reason for rejecting capital punishment. Li and Yang delve into China's communist ideology and Karl Marx's argument against the death penalty while proposing significant reforms within China's capital punishment system if it were fully abolished. Extensive research has been conducted on both black and white individuals' perspectives regarding the death penalty. The text explores African Americans' responses to various viewpoints on this issue through a National Survey experiment that randomly assigned respondents to different positions.The study's findings indicated that African Americans had a greater response to both racial and non-racial arguments, believing that black individuals were disproportionately targeted for executions and that innocent people were being wrongly sentenced to death. Additionally, the study revealed a bias within the criminal justice system due to systemic factors and personal disposition (Peffley & Hurwitz, 2007). Roberts-Cady (2010) argued against relying solely on retributive justice theories as a justification for capital punishment, stating that proportional punishment does not necessarily validate the use of the death penalty. It is crucial to acknowledge that certain punishments should not be carried out even if they are deserved. Therefore, it is recommended to explore ethical concerns beyond simply matching punishment to crime. The United States Supreme Court case Warden Smith v.Frank G.Spisak addressed issues related to mitigation instruction and ineffective assistance of counsel. The court stipulated that the defendant must demonstrate better counsel performance and ruled out federal habeas corpus review entitlement. This analysis examines how this case impacts

the death penalty in America and compares it with other countries' approaches, particularly considering the Supreme Court's decision in Roper v. [ preserved: ]The text discusses the historical context and current status of capital punishment, particularly focusing on the United States. It mentions that Western European countries abolished capital punishment in the latter half of the 20th century while the US strengthened it to combat violent crime. However, by the 21st century, most countries had abolished it except for the US. The Supreme Court ruling in Roper v. Simmons invalidated juvenile execution as cruel and unusual punishment. The paper aims to analyze various aspects related to juvenile delinquents under common law definitions and theories of special treatment, as well as examine how the US government approaches these cases. It also explores legal debates surrounding Roper v. Simmons, evaluates its significance, and assesses whether or not capital punishment remains relevant within US jurisdiction [Source: Wu,Y., Sun,I., & Wu,Z.(n.d).]. Additionally, an article titled "Support for the death penalty: Chinese and American college students compared" investigates perspectives on capital punishment among Chinese and American university students. While previous studies have focused primarily on Americans' views, this research aims to understand how Chinese citizens perceive it within their own country and compare these perspectives between both nations.The text discusses the use of data collected from university students in China and America to analyze their attitudes towards the death penalty. It reveals that Chinese students generally support capital punishment more than American students. The influence of gender, victimization, and differences in criminal justice systems across countries are also examined. Chinese individuals believe that eliminating the death penalty would give criminals

more control. The findings have implications for future research. According to Sangiorgio (2011), 139 nations had made changes to their laws or practices regarding the death penalty by 2011, while only 23 countries still implemented it globally according to Amnesty International's report. Sun (2009) focuses on human rights violations in cases involving the death penalty, particularly in nations that violate international human rights laws through executions. Sun (2009) argues that while many see the death penalty as irrational and inhumane, the Chinese government justifies its use based on their civilization. The article also explores how China's political elite manipulate the constitution-making process to suppress dissidents. Lambert et al.'s (2011) research emphasizes educating the American public about capital punishment's significance.A Supreme Court judge suggests that by offering more information and education on the subject, people's views on the death penalty could change, causing them to oppose it. To measure public opinion, the study carried out surveys before and after providing information, using multivariate analyses to back its results. Furthermore, it asserts that presenting evidence about innocence and deterrence frequently prompts individuals to reevaluate their stances.