By Dickson, Brent E. | Judicature, March/April 2006 | Go to article overview
Save to active project


Dickson, Brent E., Judicature

Capital cases not only impose significant burdens, but also shape public knowledge, trust, and confidence in the judicial system.

The responsibilities and work of a state court of last resort are significantly affected by the presence of capital punishment as a sentencing option in the state penal code. The effects are most apparent in decisional workload, administrative functions, and public perception of the judiciary generally.

The Indiana legislature reinstituted the death penalty in 1977,1 following the United States Supreme Court decision in Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976). During the ensuing 27 years, Indiana trial courts ordered the death penalty for 90 defendants. These cases produced 148 Indiana Supreme Court majority opinions, 45 reversals of the sentence with the defendant no longer eligible for the death penalty, but now serving a sentence other than death (life imprisonment without parole or for a specific term of years), and 16 executions. In the course of the 16 cases resulting in an execution, there were 33 state trial court proceedings (including trial, re-trial, and post-conviction hearings), 44 state supreme court majority opinions and substantive orders, and 25 federal court opinions.

Since 1990, death penalty cases in Indiana have been governed by a specialized rule regarding the appointment, qualifications, and compensation of trial and appellate counsel in capital cases. This rule was promulgated by the Indiana Supreme Court, which has exclusive original appellate jurisdiction in capital cases. Because trial and appellate counsel for almost all capital defendants in Indiana are appointed at public expense, Indiana's judicial experience with capital cases is best viewed in light of the practice, procedure, and results observed following the implementation of these rules.

Between the time of the rule changes in 1990 and November 15, 2005, the death penalty has been sought in Indiana trial courts against 174 defendants, of which 4 were acquitted or the charges dismissed before trial, and 30 were sentenced to death. Of these 30 defendants, 3 have been executed and 9 death sentences have been reversed with the defendant now sen-ing a sentence other than death. Eighteen of the 30 death sentences remain in appellate review or are awaiting new trials.

Over the most recent 10-year period, from 1995 through 2004, capital opinions in Indiana (including cases on direct appeal and collateral review) accounted for approximately 7 percent of the total number of signed majority opinions issued by the court.2 During this same period, however, the number of capital cases decided accounted for only 0.92 percent of the total number of cases decided by the court (including those on which review was denied by order). Thus, capital cases account for less than 1 percent of the court's caseload, but more than 7 percent of its number of written opinions. In the past 10 years, our court has decided an average of about 1,075 cases per year and issued an average of about 137 signed opinions per year, of which an average of 10 were capital cases opinions.

Judicial time and effort

Each of the court's capital case opinions represented a substantially disproportionate investment of judicial time and effort. Judicial opinions in death penalty cases are characteristically more extensive than those in non-capital criminal appeals. Because of the finality of the sentence, both defense counsel and the reviewing court endeavor to be particularly thorough and comprehensive. Courts are also inclined to address more claims on the merits and to be somewhat more hesitant to apply procedural forfeiture. It is not unusual for capital appeals to present a significantly greater number of issues than would likely be seen in non-capital cases, often including issues on which there is no basis under existing law, but wherein counsel is requesting a reexamination of precedent or seeking to preserve an issue for federal review or in anticipation of possible future modification of the law.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article



Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?