- ホーム
- > 洋書
- > ドイツ書
- > Humanities, Arts & Music
- > Psychology
Full Description
Robert F. Schopp Recent Supreme Court decisions categorically preclude the application of capital punishment to convicted offenders who were below the age of eighteen or mentally 1 retarded at the time they committed the crimes for which they were sentenced. Neither opinion suggests that offenders in these categories cannot be criminally responsible for their offenses, and the Atkins opinion explicitly recognizes that some mentally 2 retarded offenders can qualify as criminally responsible for their offenses. In each case, part of the reasoning in support of the exemption from capital sentences purports to show that capital punishment of these offenders would serve neither the retributive 3 nor the deterrent functions of criminal punishment. Both opinions focus substantial attention on the retributive rationale, contending that these offenders lack sufficient 4 culpability, blameworthiness, or depravity to merit capital punishment. The opinions recognize that a categorical bar for all offenders below a specified age or level of intelligence might exempt some individuals who do not lack culpability sufficient to justify capital sentences. The opinions draw categorical rules, however, to avoid the risk that some individuals who lack sufficient culpability to deserve capital punish- 5 ment will be misidentified as sufficiently culpable to merit capital sentences. The dissenting opinions in each case recognize that offenders in these categories have limitations that render them less culpable on average than unimpaired offenders who commit similar crimes.
Contents
Mental Disorder and the Criminal Process.- Depression and the Criminal Law: Integrating Doctrinal Empirical, and Justificatory Analysis.- Determining When Severe Mental Illness Should Disqualify a Defendant from Capital Punishment.- Accommodating Child Witnesses in the Criminal Justice System: Implications for Death Penalty Cases.- Protecting Well-Being While Pursuing Justice.- Judgments of Dangerousness and the Criminal Process.- Capital Punishment and Dangerousness.- Limited Expertise and Experts: Problems with the Continued Use of Future Dangerousness in Capital Sentencing.- Psychopathy, Culpability, and Commitment.- Quagmire Ahead!: The Sticky Role of Behavioral Science in Capital Sentencing.- Competence to Face Execution and the Roles of the Psychological Professions.- Meaningful Consideration of Competence to be Executed.- Psychological Expertise and Amicus Briefs in the Context of Competence to Face Execution.- Constitutional Health Care and Incompetency to Face Execution.
