review attachment to complete the assignment paragraphs should be two to three paragraphs a piece

week8assignment1.docx

Home >Psychology homework help >review attachment to complete the assignment paragraphs should be two to three paragraphs a piece

Capital Punishment

Jailya Wooden

DPSY 8700

January 15, 2023

Sorensen, J., & Pilgrim, R. L. (2006). Lethal injection: Capital punishment in Texas during the modern era. University of Texas Press.

In their study, Sorensen and Pilgrim (2006) identify that several state issues continue to attract a lot of national attention and controversy with the application of the death penalty in Texas. In the years following the death penalty was reestablished in 1976, Texas took the top position in the country in executing prisoners and reinforcing the death sentences. The rate at which Texas is implementing capital punishment continues to raise questions, and many scholars are starting to question the reason behind the persistence. Others explore whether the death penalty is producing any positive outcomes and whether the state has successfully eliminated perpetrators. Other scholars are questioning whether the rights of the citizens have trespassed during the implementation of the penalty and whether some people have been falsely accused. The authors identify that finding answers to these questions is essential, forming the primary objective of publishing this book by using rich information sources primarily from confidential prisoner records and numerous statistical sources. This will help challenge traditional preconceptions regarding guilt, deterrence, racial bias, and the implementation of capital punishment in this state.

Serrano, B. (2020). Stuck between Growing up and Grown up: Delaying the Sentencing Phase for Young Adults Facing Capital Punishment in Texas. Tex. Tech L. Rev., 53, 843.

Serrano (2020) starts by recognizing that prior research has been indicating that there is future danger associated with the standard relied on by juries in Texas when deciding on whether a capital offender should be sentenced to death can contribute to inaccurate forecasting. The authors state that this is already challenging to reinforce the standard when capital offenders between 18 and 25 years come into view. The author also identifies that other studies found out that since the Supreme Court decided to put juveniles on death row no longer, the brain development of these young adults between 18 and 25 years differs from that of minors. The reason for this is that the juveniles lack brain maturity and the absence of impulse control, and the young defendants are found to maintain a certain level of propensity towards risky behaviors. These aspects make it challenging for a judging panel on capital cases to tell the difference between the traits that a particular person can be a "future danger" to society since these traits can improve with older years.

The authors also identify that some aspects utilized by prosecutors in proving that the defendant can be a future danger include expert testimony, criminal history, and character evidence. However, the author identifies that these pieces are insufficient in determining which individuals will be a threat and who will improve their behavior; therefore, age cannot be relied on while ruling out criminals. The author thus pinpoints that if the standard does not differentiate between criminals adequately, the judges are arbitrarily sentencing perpetrators to death row, which violates the 8th Amendment of the American constitution. According to this article, capital offenders undergo a different trial to assess their punishment. Therefore the courts in Texas must wait until the defendant attains the age of 25 years and then decide to execute the offender. This will ultimately make a prosecutor's expert testimony, the defendant's offense history, and character evidence more potent because they can assess the level of their brain development by analyzing their behavior while in the justice system.