This study examines the contributions that briefwriters have made to the Supreme Court's death penalty jurisprudence in cases decided from 1963 to 1985. Three aspects of the briefwriters' contributions to evolving capital punishment doctrine are considered: (a) the use of social science research evidence relevant to death penalty issues, (b) literal textual similarities between briefs and the justices' opinions, and (c) diverse matters concerning the contents of briefs and their correspondence to capital punishment decisions. It appears that briefwriters have contributed significantly to the justices' use of social science evidence, even though the justices have not been persuaded to adopt the logical implications of such information. In addition, the justices have only rarely relied upon the briefs for the precise language that characterizes their opinions. The article concludes with a series of observations about the briefs, the briefwriters, and the law of capital punishment as announced in these Supreme Court cases.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Acker, J. R.
(1990a). Dual and unusual: Competing views of death penalty adjudication. Criminal Law Bulletin, 26, 123-154.
2.
Acker, J. R.
(1990b). Social science in Supreme Court criminal cases and briefs: The actual and potential contribution of social scientists as amici curiae. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 25-42.
3.
Acker, J. R.
(1990c). Social science in Supreme Court death penalty cases: A description of citation practices. Paper prepared for presentation at the 1990 annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Baltimore, MD.
4.
Acker, J. R.
(1990d). Thirty years of social science in Supreme Court criminal cases. Law and Policy, 12, 1-23.
5.
Adams v. Texas, 448 U.S. 38 (1980).
6.
Aikens v. California, 406 U.S. 813 (1972).
7.
Appelbaum, P. S.
(1987). The empirical jurisprudence of the United States Supreme Court. American Journal of Law and Medicine, 13, 335-349.
8.
Arizona v. Rumsey, 467 U.S. 203 (1984).
9.
Baldus, C. C.
, Woodworth, G. G., & Pulaski, C. A. (1990). Equal justice and the death penalty: A legal and empirical analysis. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.
10.
Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880 (1983).
11.
Bell v. Ohio, 438 U.S. 637 (1978).
12.
Bowers, W. J.
(1984). Legal homicide: Death as punishment in America 1864-1982. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.
13.
Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969).
14.
Bullington v. Missouri, 451 U.S. 430 (1981).
15.
Burt, R. A.
(1987). Disorder in the court: The death penalty and the Constitution. Michigan Law Review, 85, 1741-1819.
16.
Caplan, L.
(1987). The tenth justice: The Solicitor General and the rule of law. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.
17.
Davis v. Cieorgia, 429 U.S. 122 (1976).
18.
Dobbert v. Florida, 432 U.S. 282 (1977).
19.
Dorin, D. D.
(1981). Two different worlds: Criminology, justices and racial discrimination in the imposition of capital punishment in rape cases. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 72, 1667-1698.
20.
Eddings v. Oklahoma, 455 U.S. 104 (1982).
21.
Ehrlich, I.
(1975). The deterrent effect of capital punishment: A question of life and death. American Economic Review, 65, 397-417.
22.
Elliott, R.
(1991a). Response to Ellsworth. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 91-94.
23.
Elliott, R.
(1991b). Social science data and the APA: TheLockhart brief as a case in point. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 59-76.
24.
Ellsworth, P. C.
(1988). Unpleasant facts: The Supreme Court's response to empirical research on capital punishment. In K. C. Haas & J. A. Inciardi (Eds.), Challenging capital punishment: Legal and social science approaches (pp. 177-211). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
25.
Ellsworth, P. C.
(1991). To tell what we know or wait for Godot?Law and Human Behavior, 15, 77-90.
26.
Enmund v. Florida, 458 U.S. 782 (1982).
27.
Estelle v. Smith, 451 U.S. 454 (1981).
28.
Fowler v. North Carolina, 428 U.S. 904 (1976).
29.
Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972).
30.
Goldberg, A. J.
(1986). Memorandum to the Conference Re: Capital punishment: October term, 1963. South Texas Law Review, 27, 493-506.
31.
Green v. Georgia, 442 U.S. 95 (1979).
32.
Greenberg, J.
, & Himmelstein, J. (1969). Varieties of attack on the death penalty. Crime and Delinquency, 15, 112-120.
33.
Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976).
34.
Hafemeister, T. L.
, & Melton, G. B. (1987). The impact of social science research on the judiciary. In G. B. Melton (Ed.), Reforming the law: Impact of child development research (pp. 27-59). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
35.
Jurek v. Texas, 428 U.S. 262 (1976).
36.
In re Kemmler, 136 U.S. 436 (1890).
37.
The Legal Defense Fund's capital punishment campaign: The distorting influence of death
[Notel. (1985). Yale Law & Policy Review, 4, 158-187.
38.
Levine, M.
(1984). The adversary process and the courts: Barefoot v. Estelle. Journal of Psychiatry and Law, 12, 147-181.
39.
Lockett v. Ohio, 438 U.S. 586 (1978).
40.
Lockhart v. McCree, 476 U.S. 172 (1986).
41.
Marsel, R. S.
(1986). Mr. Justice Arthur J. Goldberg and the death penalty: A memorandum to the conference. South Texas Law Review, 27, 467-492.
42.
Marvell, T. B.
(1978). Appellate courts and lawyers: Information gathering in the adversary system. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
43.
Maxwell v. Bishop, 385 U.S. 650 (1967).
44.
Maxwell v. Bishop, 398 U.S. 262 (1970).
45.
McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279 (1987).
46.
McGautha v. California, 402 U.S. 183 (1971).
47.
Melton, G. B.
(1987). Guidelines for effective diffusion of child development research into the legal system. In G. B. Melton (Ed.), Reforming the law: Impact of child development research (pp. 280-300). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
48.
Meltsner, M.
(1973). Cruel and unusual: The Supreme Court and capital punishment. New York, NY: Random House.
49.
Miller, A. S.
, & Barron, J. A. (1975). The Supreme Court, the adversary system, and the flow of information to the justices: A preliminary inquiry. Virginia Law Review, 61, 1187-1245.
50.
Monahan, J.
, & Walker, L. (1986). Social authority: Obtaining, evaluating and establishing social science in law. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 134, 477-517.
51.
Monahan, J.
, & Walker, L. (1988). Social science research in law: A new paradigm. American Psychologist, 43, 465-472.
52.
Monday's people
. (1990, September 17). Times Union, p. A-2.
53.
Moore v. Illinois, 408 U.S. 786 (1972).
54.
Morris, T. R.
(1987). States before the U.S. Supreme Court: State attorneys general as amici curiae. Judicature, 70, 298-305.
55.
NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.
(1990). Death row U.S.A. (September 21, 1990).
56.
O'Connor, K.
(1983). The amicus curiae role of the U.S. Solicitor General in Supreme Court litigation. Judicature, 66, 256-264.
57.
Presnell v. Georgia, 439 U.S. 14 (1978).
58.
Proffitt v. Florida, 428 U.S. 242 (1976).
59.
Pulley v. Harris, 465 U.S. 37 (1984).
60.
Puro, S.
(1981). The United States as amicus curiae. In S. S. Ulmer (Ed.), Courts, law, and judicial processes (pp. 220-229). New York, NY: The Free Press.
61.
Roberts v. Louisiana, 428 U.S. 325 (1976).
62.
Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962).
63.
Roesch, R.
, Golding, S. L., Hans, V. P., & Reppucci, N. D. (1991). Social science and the courts: The role of amicus curiae briefs. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 1-11.
64.
Rosenblum, V. G.
(1978). Report on the uses of social science in judicial decision making. Unpublished manuscript, National Science Foundation.
65.
Rudolph v. Alabama, 375 U.S. 89 (1963).
66.
Schick v. Reed, 419 U.S. 256 (1974).
67.
Schwartz, B.
(1985). The unpublished opinions of the Warren Court. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
68.
Schwartz, B.
(1988). The unpublished opinions of the Burger Court. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
69.
Spaziano v. Florida, 468 U.S. 447 (1984).
70.
Sperlich, P. W.
(1980). Social science evidence and the courts: Reaching beyond the adversary process. Judicature, 63, 280-289.
71.
Stanford v. Kentucky, 109 S. Ct. 2969 (1989).
72.
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984).
73.
Supreme Court Rules. (1984). Title 28, United States Code annotated. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Company.
74.
Supreme Court Rules. (1990). Title 28, United States Code annotated, supplement. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Company.
75.
Tremper, C. R.
(1987). The high road to the bench: Presenting research findings in appellate briefs. In G. B. Melton (Ed.), Reforming the law: Impact of child development research (pp. 199-231). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
76.
Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86 (1958).
77.
Wainwright v. Witt, 469 U.S. 412 (1985).
78.
Walker, L.
, & Monahan, J. (1987). Social frameworks: A new use of social science in law. Virginia Law Review, 73, 559-598.
79.
Weisberg, R.
(1983). Deregulating death. Supreme Court Review, 1983, 305-395.
80.
Wilkerson v. Utah, 99 U.S. 130 (1879).
81.
Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 (1968).
82.
Wolfgang, M. E.
, & Riedel, M. (1973). Race, judicial discretion and the death penalty. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 407, 119-133.
83.
Woodson v. North Carolina, 428 U.S. 280 (1976).
84.
Woodward, B.
, & Armstrong, S. (1979). The Brethren: Inside the Supreme Court. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
85.
Zeisel, H.
(1976). The deterrent effect of the death penalty: Facts v. faiths. The Supreme Court Review, 1976, 317-343.
86.
Zimring, F. E.
, & Hawkins, G. (1986). Capital punishment and the American agenda. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
