Abstract
The penalty phase deliberation experiences of capital jurors guided by the “special issues” sentencing instructions were investigated. These instructions ask jurors to consider three specific issues to determine whether a defendant should receive a sentence of life imprisonment or the death penalty: whether the crime was committed deliberately; whether there is a probability that the defendant would pose a continuing threat to society; and whether the conduct of the defendant was unreasonable in light of any provocation on the part of the victim. In-depth interviews with 27 jurors explored the organization of the penalty deliberation, the topics discussed, influential factors in the decision-making process, the impact of sentencing instructions, the importance of the possibility of parole, and the stress associated with capital jury service. Jurors relied heavily on sentencing instructions to guide their deliberations and to determine their responsibilities. Future dangerousness and the possibility of parole were critical considerations in deciding between life and death. Although jurors found the capital trial to be stressful, most believed that the life or death decision should be made by jurors. Findings are discussed in light of constitutional concerns about the administration of the death penalty.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Barnett, A. (1985). Some distribution patterns for the Georgia death sentence.U. C. Davis Law Review, 18, 1327–1374.
Bowers, W. (1993). Capital punishment and contemporary values: People's misgivings and the court's misperceptions.Law and Society Review, 27, 157–175.
Caldwell v. Mississippi, 472 U.S. 320 (1985).
California jury instructions: Criminal (1986). 4th Edition. Saint Paul: West Publishing Co.
California v. Brown, 479 U.S. 538 (1987).
Costanzo, M., & Costanzo, S. (1992). Jury decision making in the capital penalty phase: Legal assumptions, empirical findings, and a research agenda.Law and Human Behavior, 16, 185–201.
Costanzo, S., & Costanzo, M. (1989, June).Penalty phase decision making: A case study. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Law and Society Association. Madison, Wisconsin.
Criminal code of Oregon and selected laws relating to juvenile court proceedings, alcoholic liquors and controlled substances. (1988). Salem: Legislative Counsel Committee.
Death penalty cases cause juror stress. (1985, January 15).San Francisco Chronicle.
Eddings v. Oklahoma, 455 U. S. 104 (1982).
Franklin v. Lynaugh, 487 U.S. 164 (1988).
Furman v. Georgia 408 U.S. 238 (1972).
Geimer, W., & Amsterdam, J. (1988). Why jurors vote for life or death: Operative factors in ten Florida death penalty cases.American Journal of Criminal Law, 15, 1–54.
Gillers, S. (1980). Deciding who dies.University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 129, 1–124.
Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976).
Hans, V. P. (1988). Death by jury. In K. C. Haas & J. A. Inciardi (Eds.),Challenging capital punishment: Legal and social science approaches (pp. 149–175). Newbury Park: Sage.
Hitchcock v. Dugger, 481 U.S. 393 (1987).
Judd, C. M., Smith, E. R., & Kidder, L. H. (1991).Research methods in social relations. Fort Worth: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Jurek v. Texas, 428 U.S. 262 (1976).
Kalven, H., & Zeisel, H. (1966).The American jury. Boston: Little, Brown.
Kaplan, M. (1987). The influencing process in group decision-making. In C. Hendrick (Ed.),Review of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 189–212.
Kaplan, S. M. (1985, July). Death, so say you all.Psychology Today, pp. 48–53.
Leeson, F. (1987, March 1). Jurors confront life and death decisions.The Oregonian, p. B3.
Lockett v. Ohio, 438 U.S. 586 (1978).
Luginbuhl, J. (1992). Comprehension of judges' instructions in the penalty phase of a capital trial: Focus on mitigating circumstances.Law and Human Behavior, 16, 203–218.
Marquart, J. W., Ekland-Olson, S., & Sorensen, J. R. (1989). Gazing into a crystal ball: Can jurors accurately predict dangerousness in capital cases?Law and Society Review, 23, 449–467.
Merton, R., Fiske, M., & Kendall, P. (1956).The focused interview. New York: Free Press.
Mills v. Maryland, 486 U.S. 367 (1988).
Model Penal Code, Section 210.6(2) (1980). American Law Institute.
Paternoster, R. (1991).Capital punishment in America. New York: Macmillan.
Penry v. Lynaugh 492 U.S. 302 (1989).
Sandstrom v. Montana, 442 U.S. 510 (1979).
Sicola, M. K., & Shreves, R. R. (1988). Jury consideration of mitigating evidence: A renewed challenge to the constitutionality of the Texas death penalty statute.American Journal of Criminal Law, 15, 55–68.
Stanford Law Review (1969). A study of the California penalty jury in first-degree murder cases.Stanford Law Review, 21, 1296–1497.
State v. Quinn, 623 P.2d 630 (Or. 1981).
State v. Wagner, 752 P.2d 1136 (Or. 1988).
State v. Wagner, 786 P.2d 93 (Or. 1990).
U.S. v. Spock, 416 F.2d 165 (1st Cir. 1969).
Wainwright v. Witt, 469 U.S. 412 (1985).
White, L. T. (1987). Juror decision making in the capital penalty trial: An analysis of crimes and defense strategies.Law and Human Behavior, 11, 113–130.
Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 (1968).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by grants to the first author from the American Psychology-Law Society and the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues. Preparation of this article was facilitated by a grant to the second author from the John Randolph and Dora Haynes Foundation. We are grateful to Craig Haney, Ed Bronson, Lawrence White, and three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this article.
About this article
Cite this article
Costanzo, S., Costanzo, M. Life or death decisions. Law Hum Behav 18, 151–170 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01499013
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01499013