Essay: How does the court system work in relation to the death penalty in the US?
*Written by X
Introduction
Throughout this essay I will be speaking through chronologically the different processes involved in the court system in death penalty cases in the US. Firstly, the guilt phase. Throughout this initial process, we see ‘death qualified’ jurors as part of a structured system of multiple different statements, defendant and prosecutor cases being presented and a verdict. Next, if necessary, there is an appeal process. This consists of a direct appeal, state post conviction and raising of federal issues that go through state courts. Finally, there is a process called clemency and commutation, which is an executive power to grant pardons, reduce a sentence, or lessen a death sentence to one of life.
Guilt Phase
The Guilt Phase consists of multiple stages itself. A preliminary examination of prospective jurors by a judge or lawyer to decide if the prospects are qualified and suitable to serve on a jury. In a capital case, prospective jurors must be “death qualified,” i.e., questioned about their ability to consider both aggravating and mitigating evidence and to render a death sentence in an appropriate case. If the judge believes that a juror’s feelings about the death penalty would impair his or her ability to judge the case and choose the punishment fairly, that juror will be dismissed “for cause.” There is an unlimited number of “for cause” challenges and typically all jurors who say that they oppose the death penalty are excluded. Jurors who are not eliminated by the judge “for cause” because of their death penalty views can be eliminated by lawyers through “peremptory challenges”. After this has settled opening statements begin which are statements, at the outset of a trial, in which the lawyer for each side gives the factfinder (the jury, or sometimes the judge alone) a preview of the case and of the evidence that will be submitted. The prosecution’s case will come next, which involves the government, who have the burden of proving the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, offers evidence to convince the jury that the defendant committed the offense. The prosecution may present many different types of evidence, including eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence. Then the defendant will deliver their case offering evidence to rebut the prosecution’s evidence. Although the defendant has no burden of proof, and is presumed to be innocent until proven otherwise, he or she may introduce evidence either to weaken the prosecution’s case or to help establish innocence. The defense may also present many different types of evidence, including alibi testimony and expert testimony that counters the prosecution’s case. Finally, closing statements are spoken which are The final statements to the judge or jury before they begin their deliberations to decide the case, in which the lawyer for each side asks the jury, or judge, to consider the evidence and apply the law in his or her client’s favor.
Appeal Process
The appeals process for death penalty cases in the US consists of several stages and can alter state by state. The first stage is the Direct Appeal, an automatic process of appeal to the state’s highest court which focusses on issues from the trial. This can either affirm the conviction and sentence, reverse the conviction, or merely reverse the death sentence. The second stage is the state post-conviction and it allows the defendants to raise issues beyond the trial records, allowing the introduction of issues such as ineffective counsel or newly discovered evidence. There are very strict deadlines and timelines, where missing a deadline can be the end of the appeal process. The defendant can petition the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari, which, if denied, is the last avenue of state remedies, and the defendant can continue in the federal court. The final stage for federal issues raised in state court appeal is the Federal Habeas Corpus. There are 3 levels, the US District Court (decision made by a judge reviewing briefs filed by the prosecution and the defence), US Court of Appeals (of which permission is not automatically given, and then will allow the defendant to be retried), and potentially the US Supreme Court (a last resort, however, they only review a handful of cases a year. Lastly, there is the ability of governors or other bodies to grant relief to a person facing execution through executive clemency. This might lead to a postponed execution, or a lesser sentence such as life without parole. This is a final resort when all legal avenues have been exhausted.
Clemency and Commutation
Typically, a governor has a great deal of discretion whether to commute a sentence of death. In some jurisdictions, the governor's commutation decision is entirely discretionary. This is also true at the federal level. On the other hand, in some states some other body must concur before a commutation can take place. Governor Brown writes of hearing at the end of his term from the Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court that a majority of the justices would concur in his decision to commute the death sentence of a prisoner with a record of prior felonies, fulfilling California's requirement of judicial approval. The chief justice explained that the justices concurred "because they know you won't be able to ask for anymore. Even where a governor's authority to commute sentences is formally shared, a governor is likely, as a practical matter, to retain the dominant voice. In Pennsylvania, for example, the Governor cannot commute any criminal sentence without the recommendation of the Board of Pardons.
Nevertheless, the Governor appoints several members of the Board and for that reason, or perhaps due to his general influence, the Board tends to follow the Governor's lead. In death penalty cases, Pennsylvania law apparently gives the Governor unlimited discretion to sign, or to not sign, a warrant of execution. Thus, no inmate can be executed without the Governor's active involvement. Although the precise forms vary in other states, the Governor typically retains a crucial role in the execution decision. Given their considerable discretionary power, one would expect to see governors who are opponents of the death penalty liberally using the commutation power to block executions. This expectation has not been met.
Conclusion
From this essay it is clear that the court system has a structured and regimented system for death penalty cases, which seems appropriate due to the seriousness it involves. I have taken you through multiple different steps in turn to provide an understanding of the time and effort that goes into a successful death penalty conviction, and even then, how it may not be set in stone due to the appeal processes and clemency arrangements available to the prosecuted individuals.
