A recent arti­cle in Second Class Justice, a weblog ded­i­cat­ed to address­ing unfair­ness and dis­crim­i­na­tion in the crim­i­nal jus­tice sys­tem, high­light­ed that the death penal­ty con­tin­ues to be arbi­trar­i­ly applied in the United States. Citing fig­ures from the American Judicature Society, author Robert Smith revealed that only 10% of U.S. coun­ties account­ed for all of the death sen­tences imposed between 2004 and 2009, and only 5% of the coun­ties account­ed for all death sen­tences between 2007 and 2009. Even in states that fre­quent­ly impose the death penal­ty (such as Texas, Alabama, Florida, California and Oklahoma), only a few coun­ties pro­duce the state’s death sen­tences. According to the arti­cle, The mur­ders com­mit­ted in those coun­ties are no more heinous than mur­ders com­mit­ted in oth­er coun­ties, nor are the offend­ers in those coun­ties more incor­ri­gi­ble than those who com­mit crimes in oth­er coun­ties. Examination of pros­e­cu­to­r­i­al prac­tices demon­strate that some pros­e­cu­tors seek death in cas­es in their juris­dic­tions while oth­er pros­e­cu­tors in the rest of the state do not seek death for the same – or even more aggra­vat­ed – mur­ders.” The arti­cle con­tains a series of slides illus­trat­ing the geo­graph­i­cal dis­par­i­ties of the death penalty.

(R. Smith, As arbi­trary as ever,” Second Class Justice, October 17, 2010). Robert Smith is coun­sel for the Harvard Law School’s Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race andJustice. See Arbitrariness and Sentencing.

Citation Guide