MyData:What Is MyData? | Login/Account Info | Download Saved Files | Logout Description & Citation--Study No. 3468 | | | ICPSR Study No.: | 3468 |
|---|
| | |
Persistent URL:
| http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03468 |
|---|
| | | Title: | Processing and Outcome of Death Penalty Appeals After Furman v. Georgia, 1973-1995: [United States] |
|---|
| | | Principal Investigator(s): | Jeffrey Fagan, Columbia Law School and Mailman School of Public Health |
|---|
| | |
| James Liebman, Columbia Law School and Mailman School of Public Health |
|---|
| | | Funding Agency: | United States Department of Justice. National Institute of Justice. |
|---|
| | | Grant Number: | 2000-IJ-CX-0035 |
|---|
| | | Bibliographic Citation: | Fagan, Jeffrey, and James Liebman. PROCESSING AND OUTCOME OF DEATH PENALTY APPEALS AFTER FURMAN V. GEORGIA, 1973-1995: [UNITED STATES] [Computer file.] ICPSR version. New York City, NY: Columbia School of Law and Mailman School of Public Health [producers], 2002. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2002. doi:10.3886/ICPSR03468 |
|---|
| | | | Summary: | This data collection effort was undertaken to analyze the
outcomes of capital appeals in the United States between 1973 and 1995
and as a means of assessing the reliability of death penalty verdicts
(also referred to herein as "capital judgments" or "death penalty
judgments") imposed under modern death-sentencing procedures. Those
procedures have been adopted since the decision in Furman v. Georgia
in 1972. The United States Supreme Court's ruling in that case
invalidated all then-existing death penalty laws, determining that the
death penalty was applied in an "arbitrary and capricious" manner and
violated Eighth Amendment protections against cruel and unusual
punishment. Data provided in this collection include state
characteristics and the outcomes of review of death verdicts by state
and year at the state direct appeal, state post-conviction, federal
habeas corpus, and all three stages of review (Part 1). Data were
compiled from published and unpublished official and archived
sources. Also provided in this collection are state and county
characteristics and the outcome of review of death verdicts by county,
state, and year at the state direct appeal, state post-conviction,
federal habeas corpus, and all three stages of review (Part 2). After
designing a systematic method for identifying official court decisions
in capital appeals and state and federal post-conviction proceedings
(no official or unofficial lists of those decisions existed prior to
this study), the authors created three databases original to this
study using information reported in those decisions. The first of the
three original databases assembled as part of this project was the
Direct Appeal Database (DADB) (Part 3). This database contains
information on the timing and outcome of decisions on state direct
appeals of capital verdicts imposed in all years during the 1973-1995
study period in which the relevant state had a valid post-Furman
capital statute. The appeals in this database include all those that
were identified as having been finally decided during the 1973 to 1995
period (sometimes called "the study period"). The second original
database, State Post-Conviction Database (SPCDB) (Part 4), contains a
list of capital verdicts that were imposed during the years between
1973 and 2000 when the relevant state had a valid post-Furman capital
statute and that were finally reversed on state post-conviction review
between 1973 and April 2000. The third original database, Habeas
Corpus Database (HCDB) (Part 5), contains information on all decisions
of initial (non-successive) capital federal habeas corpus cases
between 1973 and 1995 that finally reviewed capital verdicts imposed
during the years 1973 to 1995 when the relevant state had a valid
post-Furman capital statute. Part 1 variables include state and state
population, population density, death sentence year, year the state
enacted a valid post-Furman capital statute, total homicides, number
of African-Americans in the state population, number of white and
African-American homicide victims, number of prison inmates, number of
FBI Index Crimes, number of civil, criminal, and felony court cases
awaiting decision, number of death verdicts, number of Black
defendants sentenced to death, rate of white victims of homicides for
which defendants were sentenced to death per 100 white homicide
victims, percentage of death row inmates sentenced to death for
offenses against at least one white victim, number of death verdicts
reviewed, awaiting review, and granted relief at all three states of
review, number of welfare recipients and welfare expenditures, direct
expenditures on the court system, party-adjusted judicial ideology
index, political pressure index, and several other created
variables. Part 2 provides this same state-level information and also
provides similar variables at the county level. Court expenditure and
welfare data are not provided in Part 2, however. Part 3 provides data
on each capital direct appeal decision, including state, FIPS state
and county code for trial court county, year of death verdict, year of
decision, whether the verdict was affirmed or reversed, and year of
first fully valid post-Furman statute. The date and citation for
rehearing in the state system and on certiorari to the United States
Supreme Court are provided in some cases. For reversals in Part 4
information was collected about state of death verdict, FIPS state and
county code for trial court county, year of death verdict, date of
relief, basis for reversal, stage of trial and aspect of verdict
(guilty of aggravated capital murder, death sentence) affected by
reversal, outcome on retrial, and citation. Part 5 variables include
state, FIPS state and county codes for trial court county, year of
death verdict, defendant's history of alcohol or drug abuse, whether
the defendant was intoxicated at the time of the crime, whether the
defense attorney was from in-state, whether the defendant was
connected to the community where the crime occurred, whether the
victim had a high standing in the community, sex of the victim,
whether the defendant had a prior record, whether a state evidentiary
hearing was held, number of claims for final federal decision, whether
a majority of the judges voting to reverse were appointed by
Republican presidents, aggravating and mitigating circumstances,
whether habeas corpus relief was granted, what claims for habeas
corpus relief were presented, and the outcome on each claim that was
presented. Part 5 also includes citations to the direct appeal
decision, the state post-conviction decision (last state decision on
merits), the judicial decision at the pre-penultimate federal stage,
the decision at the penultimate federal stage, and the final federal
decision. |
|---|
| | | Subject Term(s): | appeal procedures, appellate courts, capital punishment, civil rights, death row inmates, habeas corpus, judicial decisions, judicial review, legal appeals, Supreme Court decisions |
|---|
| | | Geographic Coverage: | United States |
|---|
| | | Time Period: | 1973 - 1995 |
|---|
| | | Date(s) of Collection: | 2000 - 2001 |
|---|
| | | Unit of Observation: | Part 1: State-year, Part 2: State-county-year,
Parts 3-5: Court case |
|---|
| | | Universe: | All capital appeals in the United States decided between
1973 and 1995. |
|---|
| | | Data Type: | aggregate data, and event/transaction data |
|---|
| | | Data Collection Notes: | (1) In accordance with reporting requirements
governing confidentiality of subjects imposed by the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics,
with the agreement of the National Institute of Justice, the
researchers were prevented from publicly presenting data on any
variable based on cell "counts of 5 or less" and from publicly
presenting data on death counts "for any county with a 1990 population
of less than 100,000 unless three or more years of data [were]
combined." Data analysis for this project used the actual cell values.
However, in this public use version, all cell values that fell within
the above ranges have been set to -89 to alert the user. (2) The user
guide and codebooks are provided by ICPSR as Portable Document Format
(PDF) files. The PDF file format was developed by Adobe Systems
Incorporated and can be accessed using PDF reader software, such as
the Adobe Acrobat Reader. Information on how to obtain a copy of the
Acrobat Reader is provided on the ICPSR Web site. |
|---|
| | | | Purpose of the Study: | In its decision in Furman v. Georgia in 1972, the
United States Supreme Court invalidated all then-existing death
penalty laws, determining that the death penalty was applied in an
"arbitrary and capricious" and unreliable manner that violated Eighth
Amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishment. In 1976
the high court ruled in Gregg v. Georgia that, on its face, Georgia's
new "guided discretion" capital-sentencing procedures appeared to have
reduced the problem of arbitrary, capricious, and unreliable death
verdicts that had led the Court to invalidate prior capital statutes
in Furman v. Georgia. On the same day that it decided Gregg, the
Supreme Court also decided four other capital cases. In two of those
cases, Woodson v. North Carolina and Roberts v. Louisiana, the Court
ruled that North Carolina's and Louisiana's mandatory method of
imposing a death sentence for the crime of first-degree or capital
murder was unconstitutional. The Court determined that the Eighth
Amendment proscription of cruel and unusual punishment requires
heightened reliability of outcomes in death cases, and that this in
turn requires that each defendant be evaluated individually to
determine whether the death penalty is an appropriate punishment for
the particular crime. In these and other decisions, the Court
concluded that modern death-sentencing statutes adopted on the model
of the Georgia statute that the Court upheld on its face in Gregg
v. Georgia potentially had the capacity to provide the necessary
degree of reliability in the imposition of death verdicts. The purpose
of this study was to examine the reliability of death verdicts imposed
under presumptively valid post-Furman capital statutes by measuring
the frequency with which the state and federal courts that inspect
those verdicts found flaws in them that were sufficiently serious and
prejudicial to require reversal of the death verdict and
retrial/resentencing. A second purpose was to identify conditions at
the state, county, and case level that are associated with a higher
probability of reversible error in capital cases and to identify
possible reforms to decrease that probability. |
|---|
| | | Study Design: | The researchers created a pooled, cross-sectional
database of capital verdicts from 1973-1995 including review outcome
by stage of review, state, county, and year. Data provided for this
collection include information about the timing and outcome of death
verdict review proceedings by state and year at the state direct
appeal, state post-conviction, federal habeas corpus, and all three
stages of review, as well as a set of relevant characteristics of
death penalty states (Part 1). Information about the outcomes and
other characteristics of capital review proceedings were obtained from
official published and unpublished judicial decisions, as described
below. Other data were compiled from published and archived material
on the passage of death penalty statutes following the Furman
decision, official and archived sources providing data on population
and racial composition, homicide trends, state crime trends, state
prison population, court caseloads, court expenditures, capital
defense expenditures, state welfare caseloads and expenditures,
states' political structure, the race of defendants sentenced to die,
the race of the victims of the offenses for which defendants were
sentenced to die, and published sources providing information on
judges and judicial philosophy. An index of political pressure on
state court judges, based on characteristics of each state's method of
selecting judges for office, was created for this project, drawing on
state constitutional and statutory provisions, with additional
information supplied by the National Center for State Courts. Also
provided in this collection are state and county characteristics and
the outcomes of death verdict review proceedings by county, as well as
state and year, at state direct appeal, state post-conviction, federal
habeas corpus, and all three stages of review (Part 2). Data for Part
2 were compiled from similar sources but do not include court
expenditure and welfare data. Three databases original to this study
were assembled by the authors, all of which include information on the
outcomes of capital appeals or state and federal post-conviction
review proceedings and other information about those appeals and
proceedings and the individuals, offenses, procedures, and legal
claims involved in them. This information came from official published
and unpublished judicial decisions describing and reporting the
outcome of those appeals and state and federal post-conviction review
procedures. Identifying appellate and post-conviction decisions so
that this information could be extracted from them presented a
challenge, because no official, publicly available list existed of the
decisions in, or outcomes of, capital appeals for any state in the
country. The researchers accordingly designed a systematic way to
identify capital appellate and state and federal post-conviction
decisions by using a variety of search criteria in databases of
judicial decisions. One search criterion was the names of death row
inmates, which were identified using the following sources: the list
of individuals on death row across the country maintained and
published by the NAACP Legal Defense Fund's (NAACP LDF), "Death Row
USA", lists of death row inmates kept by state courts, state attorneys,
state prisons, state-level defender organizations, and state-level
non-governmental organizations, and newspaper accounts naming capital
prisoners. Legal databases, West's national reporter system, and the
Westlaw and Lexis electronic search engines then were searched using
(1) the names derived from the above-listed sources, (2) keyword
searches designed to identify capital appeals and state and federal
post-conviction decisions in capital cases, and (3) information in
judicial decisions identified through these same means, including
information about other cases involving the same prisoner and about
the cases of co-participants in the prisoner's offense. Information
also was obtained from official but unpublished decisions available in
archives of court and case records. The information in the three
databases original to this study is from the published and unpublished
judicial decisions that were identified through the means just
described. The first of the three databases assembled as part of this
project was the Direct Appeal Database (DADB) (Part 3). This database
contains information on decisions on state direct appeals of capital
verdicts imposed in all years during the 1973-1995 study period in
which the relevant state had a valid post-Furman capital statute. The
appeals in this database include all those that were identified as
having been finally decided during the 1973 to 1995 period. The second
original database, State Post-Conviction Database (SPCDB) (Part 4),
contains a list of capital verdicts that were imposed during the years
between 1973 and 2000 when the relevant state had a valid post-Furman
capital statute and that were finally reversed on state
post-conviction review between 1973 and April 2000. The third original
database, Habeas Corpus Database (HCDB) (Part 5), contains information
on all decisions of initial (non-successive) capital federal habeas
corpus cases between 1973 and 1995 that finally reviewed capital
verdicts imposed during years in the 1973 to 1995 period when the
relevant state had a valid post-Furman capital statute. |
|---|
| | | Sample: | Parts 1-2: Inapplicable. Parts 3-5: Allowable cases based
on criteria specific to that court process. |
|---|
| | | Data Source: | (1) NAACP Legal Defense Fund's "Death Row USA," (2)
governmental and non-governmental organizations, (3) newspaper
accounts, (4) legal databases, West's national reporter system, and
the Westlaw and Lexis electronic search engines, (5) Census Bureau
Data Set PE-19 1970-79, (6) Census Bureau State Estimates by Age, Sex,
and Race, (7) Census Bureau Estimates of the Population of States by
Age, Sex, Race and Hispanic Origin: 1981 to 1989, (8) Census Bureau
Estimates of the Population of State by Age, Sex, Race and Hispanic
Origin: 1990 to 1998, (9) Census Bureau Summary Tape File 3C (STF3C),
(10) Federal Bureau of Investigation's CRIME IN THE UNITED STATES for
1973 to 1996, (11) MORTALITY DETAIL FILES, 1968-1978 (ICPSR 7632),
(12) CDC Wonder (Centers for Disease Control data extraction engine),
(13) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for
Health Statistics, "Compressed Mortality File, 1989-98" CD-ROM Series
20, No. 2C ASCII Version, (14) United States Department of Justice,
Bureau of Justice Statistics, SOURCE BOOK OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE
STATISTICS 1973-1996, (15) STATE COURT STATISTICS, 1985-1994: [UNITED
STATES] (ICPSR 9266), (16) EXPENDITURE AND EMPLOYMENT DATA FOR THE
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM [UNITED STATES] (1971-1979: ICPSR 7618, 1982:
ICPSR 8382, 1983: ICPSR 8455, 1984: ICPSR 9162, 1985: ICPSR 9161,
1986: ICPSR 9160, 1987: ICPSR 9396, 1988: ICPSR 9554, 1989: ICPSR
9773, 1990: ICPSR 6006, 1991: ICPSR 6259, 1992: ICPSR 6579, 1993:
ICPSR 6795, 1994: ICPSR 2257, 1995: ICPSR 2840), (17) "The Statistical
Almanac of the United States 1973-1996," (18) ALMANAC OF THE FEDERAL
JUDICIARY, (19) state statutes, official state court decisions, list
of executions by date, and other published and unpublished and
archived material on the passage of death penalty statutes following
Furman v. Georgia, (20) Brace, Paul, Laura Langer, and Melinda
Hall. "Measuring the Preferences of State Supreme Court Judges,"
JOURNAL OF POLITICS 62, (2000), p. 387, (21) provisions of the 34
study states' constitutions and codes governing judicial selection,
supplemented by information from C. Flango & D. Rottman, "Appellate
Court Procedures" (National Center for State Courts, 1998), and (22)
dataset created by Professor Steven F. Messner and his colleagues at
the University of Albany and the University of Illinois. |
|---|
| | | Description of Variables: | Part 1 variables include state and state
population, population density, death sentence year, year the state
enacted a valid post-Furman capital statute, total homicides, number
of African-Americans in the state population, number of white and
African-American homicide victims, number of prison inmates, number of
FBI Index Crimes, number of civil, criminal, and felony court cases
awaiting decision, number of death verdicts, number of Black
defendants sentenced to death, rate of white victims of homicides for
which defendants were sentenced to death per 100 white homicide
victims, percentage of death row inmates sentenced to death for
offenses against at least one white victim, number of death verdicts
reviewed, awaiting review, and granted relief at all three states of
review, number of welfare recipients and welfare expenditures, direct
expenditures on the court system, party-adjusted judicial ideology
index, political pressure index, and several other created
variables. Part 2 provides this same state-level information and also
provides similar variables at the county level. Court expenditure and
welfare data are not provided in Part 2, however. Part 3 provides data
on each capital direct appeal decision, including state, FIPS state
and county code for trial court county, year of death verdict, year of
decision, whether the verdict was affirmed or reversed, and year of
first fully valid post-Furman statute. The date and citation for
rehearing in the state system and on certiorari to the United States
Supreme Court are provided in some cases. For reversals in Part 4
information was collected about state of death verdict, FIPS state and
county code for trial court county, year of death verdict, date of
relief, basis for reversal, stage of trial and aspect of verdict
(guilty of aggravated capital murder, death sentence) affected by
reversal, outcome on retrial, and citation. Part 5 variables include
state, FIPS state and county codes for trial court county, year of
death verdict, defendant's history of alcohol or drug abuse, whether
the defendant was intoxicated at the time of the crime, whether the
defense attorney was from in-state, whether the defendant was
connected to the community where the crime occurred, whether the
victim had a high standing in the community, sex of the victim,
whether the defendant had a prior record, whether a state evidentiary
hearing was held, number of claims for final federal decision, whether
a majority of the judges voting to reverse were appointed by
Republican presidents, aggravating and mitigating circumstances,
whether habeas corpus relief was granted, what claims for habeas
corpus relief were presented, and the outcome on each claim that was
presented. Part 5 also includes citations to the direct appeal
decision, the state post-conviction decision (last state decision on
merits), the judicial decision at the pre-penultimate federal stage,
the decision at the penultimate federal stage, and the final federal
decision. |
|---|
| | | Response Rates: | Not applicable. |
|---|
| | | Presence of Common Scales: | None. |
|---|
| | | | Note: | A list of the data formats available for this study can be found in the
summary of holdings. Detailed file-level information (such as record length, case count, and variable count) is listed in the
file manifest. |
|---|
| | | Original ICPSR Release: | 2002-08-29 |
|---|
| | | Version History: | The last update of this study occurred on 2006-03-30. |
|---|
| | |
| 2006-03-30 - File UG3468.ALL.PDF was removed from any previous datasets and flagged as a study-level file, so that it will accompany all downloads. |
|---|
| | |
| 2006-03-30 - File CB3468.ALL.PDF was removed from any previous datasets and flagged as a study-level file, so that it will accompany all downloads. |
|---|
| | |
| 2005-11-04 - On 2005-03-14 new files were added to one
or more datasets. These files included additional setup files as well
as one or more of the following: SAS program, SAS transport, SPSS portable,
and Stata system files. The metadata record was revised 2005-11-04 to
reflect these additions. |
|---|
| | | Dataset(s): | - DS1: State Characteristics and Death Verdict Reversals by State and Year
- DS2: State and County Characteristics and Death Verdict Reversals by County, State, and Year
- DS3: Direct Appeal Data
- DS4: State Post-Conviction Data
- DS5: Habeas Corpus Data
|
|---|
| |

|