Torres

Annaliza Torres
Writing 10
Professor Moberly
16 May 2015
Fixing Capital Punishment To Reinstatement
Abstract
Capital Punishment, the death penalty, was the most serious punishment society
could impose on someone for committing a serious crime such as homicide in California.
Overall, however, it was difficult to prove the effectiveness of deterrence due to the flaws
in the system. The main flaws were delay in obtaining justice, racial discrimination, and
high cost. In result to finding these main flaws, many questioned the power of the capital
punishment in California. Since most of the flaws were not addressed, this created delay
and it was addressed as arbitrary. The flaws drove the United States District Court to rule
California's capital punishment system unconstitutional. Although the capital punishment
is no longer active in California, this research paper attempts to fix and find solutions for
its flaws in order to reinstate the capital punishment legislation.
Background
Even though California is a state, which supports capital punishment, it is also a
state that very rarely executed its death row inmates. Since the year 2000 there have been
722 prisoners sentenced to death, of which 278 Caucasians, 170 African Americans, and
50 Hispanics were on death roll. Despite the high amount of death row inmates, the state
hasnt put anyone to death since 2006. That same year, U.S District Judge Jeremy Fogel
halted the capital punishment in California after finding flaws in the state execution

Torres 2

process (Eckholm). The death penalty in California was put on hold while the state tried
to fix the main flaws in its system such as delay in obtaining justice, racial
discrimination, and high cost. These three factors were chosen because they were
frequently seen in debates. They also expressed to be the most concern among
Californians.
On July 16, 2014, federal judge Cormac J. Carney of the United States District
Court ruled that California's capital punishment system unconstitutional because it is
arbitrary and plagued with delay (Eckholm). Even though capital punishment is no longer
active in California, capital punishment remains to be a big issue. The idea that someone
deserves the highest level of punishment is questionable based on various factors. Despite
of its unconstitutional ruling, majority of Californians supports capital punishment stating
that it is a necessary to reinstate the law. According to the field poll conducted by the San
Jose Mercury News, in September 2014, 56% of respondents said they favored keeping
the death penalty (Figure 2).

Figure 2

Torres 3

Three-Pronged Problem
The three main flaws found in the capital punishment system in California are
arbitrary delay in obtaining justice, racial discrimination, and high cost that drove United
States District Court to rule California's capital punishment system unconstitutional.
Delay in Justice
The fact that there have been no executions in California since 2006 raises
another important consideration in the death penalty argument: The time lag between
conviction and execution. Five years ago that differential in California was more than 17
years, or twice the national average of 9.8 years. Today it is more than 25 years, partly
due to the stay of all executions in the state (Johnson). In fact, a condemned convict in
California is more likely to die of old age than by execution. Although thirteen California
inmates have been executed, 78 have died of natural or other causes (Condemned
Inmates..). Thus, in addition to compounding the escalating costs of death penalty cases,
these delays create other issues, such as due process concerns and a lack of closure for
the victims families.
In the words of former California Supreme Court Chief Justice, Ronald George,
The seven justices of the California Supreme Court no longer can handle the state's
entire death penalty appeal workload while at the same time fulfilling the court's primary
purpose: to consider the 9,000 to 10,000 petitions it receives annually (Gray). California
law requires that the California Supreme Court review every death sentence. This process
now takes over ten years (Williams). A backlog at the California Supreme Court is
another reason for death penalty delays.

Torres 4

Racial Discrimination
Race discrimination exists within the criminal justice system. Part of the public
holds the notion that minorities are more likely to receive the death penalty when
compared to other racial groups. If this assumption is found true it can bring major
concerns with fairness. A recent study done on the influence of race, political orientation,
and peer group shows extralegal bias factors among mock jurors. The results of the
studies showed evidence of jurors being influenced by the defendants sex, level of
physical attractiveness, and level of socio economic status. The scenarios of African
Americans facing more chances of being executed for crimes has to take another angle as
they are mostly involved in the criminal activity due to their upbringing. Facing death
sentences seems an ordinary occurrence for them as they experience the same during
their daily activities from fellow gangs and rival enemies (Jost). The approach however,
lacks the legal backing of the society, but the proponents approach seems to take a
bigger support from the American Society. The stages set will mean that the given laws
on capital punishment also get reorganized to fit the need of preventing any crimes that
might arise in the Californian community.
High Cost
Cost is a unique interest to tax payers and lawmakers. Capital punishment is said to
cost the state an immense amount of money, and is viewed as an unnecessary expense.
While conducting research there were articles claiming capital punishment is more
expensive than a life sentence, although there are also articles stating vice-versa. Reports
have found the death penalty consumes 2.16 million dollars more per execution than
sentencing a convict to life in prison (Johnson). The question that comes from this

Torres 5

information is whether the cost is worth it.

Three-Pronged Approach/Solution
Restructuring the manner in which capital punishment is being viewed and applied
in the California state needs a different approach and understanding. The capital
punishment legislation faced challenges in judicial, racial, and financial levels that drove
United States District Court to rule California's capital punishment system
unconstitutional. The need of restructuring the capital punishment legislation has been
seen but not acted upon on. The following are proposals in which will potentially fix the
flaws of legislation. In hopes of reforming capital punishment legislation, this will drive
United States District Court to revive capital punishment in California.
Delay in Obtaining Justice
This aspect offers a bigger argument for supporting the need to restructuring how
capital punishment can be reinstated in California. The delay in justice suggests that an
equal measure of punishment must be subjected to an equal measure of crime. By
reforming the appeals process for those cases with special circumstances such as
homicide, California will ensure justice is not unnecessarily delayed. Therefore, it would
be ideal if the Court will review more serious cases, such as homicide, in great
importance than other cases such as theft. This way, it will also take the strain off
families whove had to relive the tragedy they suffered every five years in onerous
technical appeals, and prevent those whose guilt is certain from getting de-facto retrials at
the states highest level of justice. By strengthening the process, it will ensure justice for
the families of homicide victims. No one believes we should punish those that dont
deserve it. Moreover, the Justice delayed is justice denied (Jost). The possibilities of

Torres 6

such an approach will prove relevant to the general population to deter and reduce crimes
especially those that carry capital punishment.
Racial Discrimination
Although, human nature prevents people at times to be unable to control for
prejudice. Therefore it would be ideal to have a group review the case. This group will
review the defendants case and determine if capital punishment is the right punishment
for a crime. The group will be known as Capital Punishment Review Board. People on
the review board will be chosen the same way a jury is obtained for court. They will be
provided with the defendants case describing the crime and evidence obtained. After
reviewing, just like a jury in a courtroom, they will agree to a verdict. This will help
lessen and further prevent racial discrimination in the courtroom. To prevent unintended
and intended racial discrimination another jury will review the defendants case and
conclude if capital punishment is past due to the severity of the crime. Within this review
the jury will not know the identity of the victim. The jury will only be provided with the
description of the crime and the evidence presented. This will disregard any concerns for
racial discrimination within trails.
High Cost
Capital punishment admittedly is an immense cost to the state. The reason is
because this type of case contains more trails, and that includes more lawyers, witnesses,
and experts. When a flaw is found within the trail it has to be redone, adding more to the
cost. There is also a large amount of appeals. Viewing the solution with innocence, if
DNA evidence is required then the amount of appeals conducted can decrease. Since
there is a higher probability of the convicted not being innocent. In the end the cost

Torres 7

should not outweigh the importance of executing justice.

Conclusion
In conclusion, death penalty restructuring has faced different approaches in the
society where there are those who support it and others are opposed to the scheme. The
three approaches require the support of the Californian community to adjust to the needs
of preserving lives and deterring crime in the state. The manner in which the public has
taken the debate imposes a responsibility to the state government to come up with
procedures and institutions that will be mandated to fight crime through advocating for s
for capital offences. Crimes committed should be handled independently from racial
surroundings and each case handled on its merits and demerits. Where a case that
requires a death sentence to be given, the law should take its due course and the same
applied in cases where death sentences are not involved. The reduction of criminal
activities will considerably reduce in due time based on the harsh nature of the
consequences likely to occur to them if they engage in them. Capital punishment is
needed, regardless of the flaws it had. This research paper is written in the hopes that it
can contribute to the solution of these flaws. This essay focused on justice, race, and cost
although these were not the only flaws. There are other minor flaws within the system
that should be addressed. The purpose of capital punishment is to enforce justice, to
rightfully punish the convicted according to their crime, and to ensure that justice is done
correctly.

Torres 8

Works Cited
Eckholm, Erik, and John Schwartz. "California Death Penalty System Unconstitutional,
Federal Judge Rules." New York Times 17 July 2014. Web. 21 Apr. 2015.
Condemned Inmates Who Have Died Since 1978. California Department of Corrections
and Rehabilitation, 2015. Print.
"Death Penalty Support Slipping in California, Poll Says." San Jose Mercury News
California 14 Sept. 2014. Web. 21 Apr. 2015.
Johnson, Michelle. "Death Penalty." CQ Researcher 13 May 2014. Web. 15 Mar.
2015.print
Jost, Kenneth. "Death Penalty Debates." CQ Researcher 19 Nov. 2010: 965-88. Web. 15
Mar. 2015.print
Jost, Kenneth. "Rethinking the Death Penalty." CQ Researcher 16 Nov. 2001: 945-68.
Gray, James. "Special Issue: Rethinking the Death Penalty in California." Essay: Facing
Facts on the Death Penalty. Vol. 44. Los Angeles: Loyola Marymount U, 2011.
Print.
Williams, CJ. "California Death Penalty Foes to Try for Ballot Initiative." Los Angeles
Times 26 Aug. 2011. Web.