14
Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
10
492 U.S. 361 (1989).
11
492 U.S. 361 (the Stanford v. Kentucky
and Wilkins v. Missouri cases were
consolidated).
12
These diagnostic evaluations involved
psychiatric, neurological, psychological,
neuropsychological, educational, and
electroencephalographic (EEG) exami-
nations. Dr. Dorothy Lewis and
colleagues conducted psychiatric inter-
views with the offenders; obtained
detailed neurological histories; corrob-
orated those histories when possible
through physical examinations, record
reviews, and specialized tests such as
the EEG; performed neurological and
mental status examinations; deter-
mined whether offenders had been
physically and/or sexually abused as
youth through lengthy interviews;
performed neurometric quantitative
EEG’s; and conducted neuropsychol-
ogical and educational testing using
tests such as the WAIS, Bender-Gestalt
test, Rorschach Test, Halstead-Reitan
Battery of Neuropsychological Tests,
and Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-
Educational Battery.
13
For more information on inadequate
legal representation, see A Broken
System: Error Rates in Capital Cases
1973–1995, which states that the
most common errors found in capital
cases are “(1) egregiously incompetent
defense lawyering (accounting for 37%
of the state post-conviction reversals)
and (2) prosecutorial suppression of
evidence that the defendant is
innocent or does not deserve the
death penalty (accounting for another
16–19 percent, when all forms of law
enforcement misconduct are consid-
ered” (Liebman, Fagan, and West,
2000:5).
14
See Wright v. Angelone, No. 97–32
(4th Cir. July 16, 1998).
15
535 So. 2d 362 (La. 1988).
16
615 So. 2d 1333 (La. 1993).
17
586 So. 2d 978 (Ala. Ct. Crim. Ap.
1991).
18
636 So. 2d 494 (1994).
19
540 N.E.2d 1216 (Ind. 1989).
20
754 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1999).
21
A report issued by the American Bar
Association in January 2000 details
recent legislative, judicial, and executive
branch activity relating to the death
penalty (American Bar Association,
2000).
22
G.A. Res. 44/25, annex, 44 U.N.
GAOR, Supp. No. 49, at 167, U.N. Doc.
A/44/49 (1989).
23
Lipsey and Wilson (1998:338) report
that in a meta-analysis of 200 studies
of intervention with serious offenders,
the best programs “were capable of
reducing recidivism rates by as much
as 40%” and that the “average” inter-
vention reduced recidivism rates by
approximately 12 percent. See also
Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention, 1998.
References
American Bar Association. 2000. A
Gathering Momentum: Continuing
Impacts of the American Bar Association
Call for a Moratorium on Executions.
Washington, DC: American Bar
Association.
Amnesty International. 1991. USA: The
Death Penalty and Juvenile Offenders.
New York, NY: Amnesty International
USA Publications.
Amnesty International. 1998. On the
Wrong Side of History: Children and
the Death Penalty in the USA. New
York, NY: Amnesty International USA
Publications.
Bassham, G. 1991. Rethinking the
emerging jurisprudence of juvenile
death. Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics,
and Public Policy 5(2):467–501.
Evans, K.L. 1992.Trying juveniles as
adults: Is the short-term gain of retri-
bution outweighed by the long-term
effects on society? Mississippi Law
Journal 62(1):95–131.
Hale, R.L. 1997. A Review of Juvenile
Executions in America. Criminology
Series, vol 3. Lewiston, NY: Edwin
Mellen Press.
Hanna, J. 2000. Mandatory life term for
teen rejected. Chicago Tribune (June 22).
Jackson, S. 1996.Too young to die—
juveniles and the death penalty—
a better alternative to killing our
children:Youth empowerment. New
England Journal on Criminal and Civil
Confinement 22(2):391–437.
Lewis, D.O., Pincus, J.H., Bard, B.,
Richardson, E., Prichep, L.S., Feldman, M.,
and Yeager, L. 1988. Neuropsychiatric,
psychoeducational, and family charac-
teristics of 14 juveniles condemned to
death in the United States. American
Journal of Psychiatry 145(5):585–589.
Liebman, J.S., Fagan, J., and West,V. 2000.
A Broken System: Error Rates in Capital
Cases 1973–1995. New York, NY:
Columbia Law School.
Lipsey, M.W., and Wilson, D.B. 1998.
Effective intervention for serious juve-
nile offenders:A synthesis of research.
In Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders:
Risk Factors and Successful Interventions,
edited by R. Loeber and D.P. Farrington.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications,
Inc., pp. 313–345.
Logan,W.A. 1998. Proportionality and
punishment: Imposing life without
parole on juveniles. Wake Forest Law
Review 33:681–725.
Matthews, S. 1995. Juvenile capital
offenders on empathy. Reclaiming
Children and Youth (Summer):10–12.
Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention. 1998. Serious
and Violent Juvenile Offenders. Bulletin.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs,
Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention.
Robinson, D.A., and Stephens, O.H.
1992. Patterns of mitigating factors in
juvenile death penalty cases. Criminal
Law Bulletin 28(3):246–275.