2012University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository (University of Missouri)Open access

The Debate on Whether Life Sentences Should Be Considered: Will Missouri's Proportionality Review Remain Meaningful?

Alexandra E. Wilson-Schoone

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

This Law Summary will address the Supreme Court of Missouri's proportionality review jurisprudence, the rationales of two opinions in Deck," and the relationship of the Deck opinions to precedent and public policy. Additionally, this Summary will address the court's subsequent application of and debate about proportionality review as well as the legislative response. Finally, this Summary will conclude that for proportionality review to serve a meaningful function, the court must consider all affirmed, factually similar capital cases that resulted in either life imprisonment or a death sentence because only considering factually similar cases which resulted in the death penalty essentially guarantees a finding of proportionality.1

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This Law Summary will address the Supreme Court of Missouri's proportionality review jurisprudence, the rationales of two opinions in Deck," and the relationship of the Deck opinions to precedent and public policy. Additionally, this Summary will address the court's subsequent application of and debate about proportionality review as well as the legislative response. Finally, this Summary will conclude that for proportionality review to serve a meaningful function, the court must consider all affirmed, factually similar capital cases that resulted in either life imprisonment or a death sentence because only considering factually similar cases which resulted in the death penalty essentially guarantees a finding of proportionality.1

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This Law Summary will address the Supreme Court of Missouri's proportionality review jurisprudence, the rationales of two opinions in Deck," and the relationship of the Deck opinions to precedent and public policy. Additionally, this Summary will address the court's subsequent application of and debate about proportionality review as well as the legislative response. Finally, this Summary will conclude that for proportionality review to serve a meaningful function, the court must consider all affirmed, factually similar capital cases that resulted in either life imprisonment or a death sentence because only considering factually similar cases which resulted in the death penalty essentially guarantees a finding of proportionality.1

Key concepts: Supreme court, Sentence, Life imprisonment, Proportionality (law), Law, Jury, Political science, Philosophy

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Debate on Whether Life Sentences Should Be Considered: Will Missouri's Proportionality Review Remain Meaningful? — Research Paper | ScholarLens