Abstract
Controversy surrounding issues of race and the death penalty has been continuously debated among politicians and within academia. One such disagreement is whether disparities exist based on race and class among those offenders convicted in capital punishment cases and sentenced to death. There is no clear answer provided by previous research; therefore, researchers continue to address the issue of differential treatment in capital cases. Adding to the current literature, Urbina (2012) makes four main assertions in his current book Capital Punishment in America: Race and the Death Penalty Over Time. First, institutionalized racism is still a predominant aspect of the American criminal justice system. Second, death penalty research focuses almost exclusively on two of the five possible death sentence outcomes (discussed later). Third, quantitative studies on capital punishment are mostly limited to dichotomous comparisons of Caucasians and African Americans; thus, neglecting a large portion of the general population (specifically, Latinos). Finally, characteristics and backgrounds of Latino’s on death row have been greatly ignored by qualitative researchers.
Urbina (2012) begins with a general introduction to his book, followed by a chapter devoted entirely to an extensive review of race and ethnicity relations and differential treatment, in the American justice system. He begins Chapter 2 by discussing the long history of oppression and maltreatment of African Americans, particularly when it comes to crime and punishment. He concludes this chapter by addressing pervasive discrimination against Latinos, especially Mexicans, in the justice system. According to Urbina (2012, p. 37), “together with ideological justifications, a racist media, and, above all, access to the law, Anglo settlers were in a powerful position to treat the Chicano population as people without rights.” He challenges the reader to rethink preconceived notions about race, ethnicity, and justice. However, passion aside, at times, the lengthy chapter can be a bit dense.
Chapter 3 is a comprehensive literature review of relevant research studies conducted between 1930 and 2008 that address possible racial and ethnic disparities, of not only the offender’s chances of being sentenced to death sentence but also in death sentence outcomes (e.g., commutation, conviction overturned, or sentence overturned). Because there are over 80 studies included in his review, Urbina (2012, pp. 67–89, 96–105) provides detailed tables listing the author/authors, time period for each study, how it operationalized dependent and independent variables, and its general findings. Three lengthy reviews of studies examining death sentence outcomes in California, Florida, and Texas illustrate differences in death penalty cases between jurisdictions. Overall, he finds mixed results in the literature regarding disparity among race, ethnicity, state of conviction, and death sentence outcomes.
Urbina (2012, p. 4) argues that “race and ethnicity would be expected to have independent effects on unequal death sentence outcomes after statistically controlling for legal and socio-demographic factors.” In other words, contrary to the commonly held belief that the justice system is becoming more “color blind,” disparities among race and ethnicity still exist. Throughout his book, he addresses eight hypotheses regarding the relationship between death sentence outcomes–based offender race, ethnicity, and the state of conviction. He presents his quantitative study in Chapter 5. His work is unique because instead of using the traditional dichotomous measure (execution vs. commutation) to operationalize death sentence outcomes, he provides five categories (i.e., execution, commutation, death sentence ruled unconstitutional, conviction overturned, or sentence overturned). The primary independent variables consist of race/ethnicity (Caucasian, African American, and Hispanic) and state of conviction (California, Florida, and Texas).
Urbina (2012) also identifies additional theoretically relevant predictor variables. He found that age, education, criminal history, marital status, and sex affect death sentence outcome. However, due to the small number of female offenders sentenced to the death penalty in the United States, he opted to omit sex from his final models. To test his hypotheses, Urbina (2012) employed chi-square analysis and logistic regression. He found mix results regarding disparities in death sentence outcomes. Surprisingly however, he did not find a significant difference in death sentences outcomes, based on race or ethnicity, across states.
In Chapter 6, Urbina (2012) discusses the results of a content analysis of numerous documents compiled from various newspapers, court records, and correctional officials (p. 191) to gain a better qualitative understanding of the backgrounds and life experiences of Latinos sentenced to death row. He also divides the Latinos on death row into ethnic categories (e.g., Mexican, Cuban, and Puerto Rican). It appears the majority of Latinos executed in the United States from 1975 to 2010 were of Mexican heritage (p. 195).
In Chapter 7 and his Afterword, Urbina’s (2012) urges researchers to further examine capital punishment outcomes in terms of race, ethnicity (specifically, disaggregating the Latino population), socioeconomic class, and female offenders on death row. He also advocates for change in public perception regarding race, ethnicity, and the criminal justice system. Finally, the reader is provided with an Appendix detailing offender and victim characteristics, as well as date and method of execution for every person executed from 1976 to 2010 (Urbina, 2012, pp. 261-329).
Urbina’s (2012) Capital Punishment in America: Race and the Death Penalty Over Time tackles very emotionally charged issues that have polarized our nation for centuries. The United States is considered “the melting pot” but as he suggests, we may not have melted together as well as we believe. Due to the extremely in-depth historical review as well as the technical material regarding his statistical analyses, the book is not quite suited for the lay person. Though the author does a commendable job in explaining the analytical processes, without at least a basic knowledge of statistics, the reader may have a hard time following the quantitative analysis in Chapter 4. However, for academics, scholars, and researchers, Urbina (2012) passionately and persuasively brings to the foreground issues of race, ethnicity, and capital punishment that are, to this day, often overlooked in the behavioral sciences as well as in criminal justice.