Assignment Task: Miranda Muzquiz
Manage Discussion by Miranda Muzquiz
Reply from Miranda Muzquiz
The death penalty is a serious penalty that is given to those who commit heinous crimes that meet the criteria of the punishment. For many states, they do not have the option for the death penalty regardless of the crime, and in states that do, this form of punishment has been called into question in terms of its ethicalness and deterrence ability. The death penalty for juveniles has historically been controversial itself, and U.S. Supreme Court cases have defined the future of what the death penalty for juveniles looks like (Stewart, 2021). Regarding the discussion post, I feel there are valid arguments for all three of the discussion points, but I think the death penalty should be for those who are over eighteen, but also is dependent on the crime. I think two things can be true at once: those who are liable for the death penalty can be penalized this way (that are not juveniles under 18), but it should be dependent on the crime committed.
Roper v Simmons was a crucial Supreme Court case that determined the future of juvenile cases with the death penalty. The issue at hand is the idea that someone who is 17 years old and is sentenced to death constitutes cruel and unusual punishment, which is unconstitutional against the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments (American Psychological Association, 2004). Cruel and unusual punishment is a term we hear when there are cases that constitute the use of this definition, even in conversations that do not include the death penalty. For the inclusion of the death penalty for juveniles, it is important for those to consider the factors of the influence that these conversations can have, and typically, society sides with the idea that juveniles cannot be punished in such a heinous way, no matter the crime. This ideology follows through to the Miller v Alabama case, where it was ruled that even the sentence of life imprisonment for juveniles is unconstitutional regarding the Eighth Amendment.
Stewart (pg. 99, 2021) outlines the death penalty considerations when there are aggravating factors that can be used to sentence someone to the death penalty. This would be where the argument for those over 18 could be sentenced to death, but the crime is dependent because these mitigating factors are also dependent on the circumstances of the crime. These include the offense that was committed, or the offender was attempting to commit, kidnapping, rape, or the principal offender in aggravated murder, the offender was previously convicted of an offense of purposeful killing or attempt to kill two or more persons (Stewart, pg.99, 2021). Although I understand the argument of development not being complete until 25, there are understandable consequences that people naturally understand across society. The simplest of ideas, everyone knows that if you are caught doing something against the law, you will get in trouble, this is also understood at a greater, more heinous level as well. With the understanding of consequences, those who choose to commit a crime should ultimately be punished. There are circumstances that prevent the understanding of consequences, such as mental illness, mental age, pressure from peers, or being forced to commit crimes, which all should be taken into consideration. When these factors are weighed against the commission of a crime, it should then be determined the sentence appropriate to match the situation. Need Assignment Help?
American Psychological Association. (2004). Roper v Simmons.
Stewart, T. (2021). Capital punishment of young adults in light of evolving standards of science and decency: Why Ohio should raise the minimum age for death penalty eligibility to twenty-five (25) Cleveland State Law Review, 70(1), 91-119.