Death Ineligibility and Habeas Corpus

63 Pages Posted: 20 May 2012 Last revised: 21 Jun 2012

See all articles by Lee Kovarsky

Lee Kovarsky

University of Texas School of Law

Date Written: 2010

Abstract

I examine the interaction between what I call 'death ineligibility' challenges and the habeas writ. A death ineligibility claim alleges that a criminally-confined capital prisoner belongs to a category of offenders for which the Eighth Amendment forbids execution. By contrast, a 'crime innocence' claim alleges that, colloquially speaking, a capital prisoner 'wasn’t there, and didn’t do it.' In the last eight years, the Supreme Court has identified several new ineligibility categories, including mentally retarded offenders. Configured primarily to address crime innocence and procedural challenges, however, modern habeas law is poorly equipped to accommodate ineligibility claims. Death Ineligibility traces the genesis of, and suggests an appropriate response to, the new variants of ineligibility - concluding that procedural obstacles should not bar relief for death ineligible claimants.

Keywords: habeas, habeas corpus, federal jurisdiction, death penalty, capital punishment, sentencing, mental illness, mental health, mental retardation, juvenile, federal jurisdiction, criminal law, criminal procedure, execution, ineligibility, actual innocence, post-conviction

Suggested Citation

Kovarsky, Lee, Death Ineligibility and Habeas Corpus (2010). Cornell Law Review, Vol. 95, p. 329, 2010, U of Maryland Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2012-29, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2061469

Lee Kovarsky (Contact Author)

University of Texas School of Law ( email )

727 East Dean Keeton Street
Austin, TX 78705
United States

HOME PAGE: http://https://law.utexas.edu/faculty/lee-kovarsky/

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
38
Abstract Views
408
PlumX Metrics