Felony Jury Sentencing in Practice: A Three-State study

The Court's recent decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), has prompted renewed interest in sentencing by jury in non-capital cases. Yet jury sentencing in felony cases remains one of the least understood procedures in contemporary American criminal justice. This Article looks...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: King, Nancy J. (Author)
Contributors: Noble, Rosevelt L.
Format: Electronic Book
Language:English
Published: 2004
In:Year: 2004
Online Access: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Check availability: HBZ Gateway

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002c 4500
001 1866157620
003 DE-627
005 20250125054915.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231018s2004 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1866157620 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1866157620 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a King, Nancy J.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Felony Jury Sentencing in Practice: A Three-State study 
264 1 |c 2004 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a The Court's recent decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), has prompted renewed interest in sentencing by jury in non-capital cases. Yet jury sentencing in felony cases remains one of the least understood procedures in contemporary American criminal justice. This Article looks beyond idealized visions of jury sentencing to examine for the first time how felony jury sentencing actually operates in three different states-Kentucky, Virginia, and Arkansas. Dozens of interviews with prosecutors, defenders, and judges, as well as an analysis of state sentencing data, reveal that this neglected corner of state criminal justice provides a unique window through which one can observe some of the most fundamental forces operating in criminal adjudication today. It turns out that jury sentencing in practice looks very little like jury sentencing in theory. Sentencing by jury is promoted for its democratic contribution, but its vitality may turn instead upon its ability to streamline case disposition and protect elected officials from political accountability for sentencing policy. Jury sentencing is viewed by these criminal justice insiders as a critical component of the justice system in each state, a tool they have adapted to deter trials, to accommodate elected judges, and to appease constituents who support ever higher sentences for crime. The Article explores the implications of this research for sentencing reform, and criminal justice reform generall 
700 1 |a Noble, Rosevelt L.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
856 4 0 |u https://core.ac.uk/download/270263174.pdf  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4391838389 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1866157620 
LOK |0 005 20231018043726 
LOK |0 008 231018||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)CORE75607539 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a core 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw