Final Exam Study Guide
Final Exam Study Guide 4362
Popular in Social Psychology of Justice
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Psychlogy
This 10 page Study Guide was uploaded by Emily Brandenburg on Sunday April 26, 2015. The Study Guide belongs to 4362 at Ohio University taught by Hoyt in Winter2015. Since its upload, it has received 140 views. For similar materials see Social Psychology of Justice in Psychlogy at Ohio University.
Reviews for Final Exam Study Guide
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 04/26/15
Final Exam Study Guide Chapter 13 Juries and Judges as Decision Makers x Jury Deliberation and Dynamics 0 Story Model and Meter Model I Story each person formulates how the events of a crime may have happened 0 Different formulations so there are different stories 0 Have to take time to reconcile the differences in the deliberation room I Meter Model innocent until proven guilty scale not guilty to guilty 0100 0 Each juror should start at quot0 but do jurors think that way or are they already starting at quot20 or quot50 0 Usually start at quot50 0 Influence of Size ofJury I Can have fewer than 12jurors 0 Williams v Florida I Pros and Cons of smallerjuries 0 Pros less stories less likely to hang easier to find jurors because you need less 0 Cons less representative of the population less deliberation o Conformity Issues 0 Asch s conformity studies o Is conformity the same for a 12person jury that is split 102 as a 6person jury split 51 I These are very different because in the 122 situation the minority is not a single person who can easily be persuaded I Decision Rules 0 Johnson v Louisiana unanimity vs majority o Unanimous more hungjuries and everyone must be sure of their decision o Majority less deliberation as soon as a majority is reached then the discussion ends I Must be no less than a 93 vote x Group Decision Making and the Jury 0 Procedures I Selection ofJury Foreperson 0 Based on experience or occupation personality outgoing males are more likely I Decisions about how to proceed with deliberation o Tacit or Formal o Tacit justjump into the decision making no stepbystep 0 Formal lay out the procedure on how to go about decision 0 Formal is much better 0 Straw poll or discussion 0 Straw poll is to vote before the discussion 0 Decision about first vote 0 Type of voting procedure I No raising hands because of conformity issues I Use a secret ballot 0 Decision on how to end deliberation 0 Sign the form and end it or it could be a hungjury o Context I Issues about how to make a quotgoodquot decision I Reasonable doubt jury nullification weight of evidence circumstantial evidence 0 Individuals in Groups I Influence and status 0 Education level occupation the way someone dresses social class gender race and age all affect how much other jurors will trustor judge you I Nonverbal eye contact number of vocalizations body language 0 Effects of Deliberation I Group polarization 0 Groups go further in the direction they were leaning as individuals after deliberation o quot70 to quot90 or quot40 to quot20 o Twothirds rule and minority influence 0 Twothirds is the tipping point but less than that and the minority has a chance to change opinions x This rule is stronger when it s twothirds for acquittal x Judges and the US Supreme Court 0 City county district courts I Civil suits misdemeanors 0 State Courts Probate Courts Juvenile Court State Court of Appeals State Supreme Court not every state has one 0 Federal Court 94 Federal Courts I Broken up byjurisdiction which is based on population 0 US Court of Appeals 13 courts 0 Supreme Court 9 Justices I Majority Rule many 54 ruling x Issues that may affect Judicial decisions 0 Professional experience ofJudge I Lawyer many from the prosecution o How judges get theirjobs I State judges can be elected or selected 0 Nominated or appointed by the governor I Federal Judges nominated by President confirmed by Senate has job for life can be impeached 0 Don t have to have a legal background 0 Personal beliefs about the law x Appealing a Verdict 0 Must have a reason for the appeal I Evidentiary Appeals 0 New evidence not reinterpretation of the old I Constitutional Law Issues 0 Have the defendant s constitutional rights been violated o Miranda rights due process unwarranted piece of evidence o Is a current law unconstitutional I Misinterpretation of law 0 Precedent not adhered to 0 Expert witness not allowed 0 Judge s interpretation reconsidered I Conflicting laws 0 Many laws have opposing counterparts 0 Double Jeopardy I Inadequate legal representation 0 Sleeping druguse mental illness under prepared under qualified etc x Prison Life 0 Types of Prisons I Minimum security maximum security supermax 0 Rights of prisoners I 605705 increasing rights to prisoners 0 Right to mail basic healthcare I SOsnow narrowing those rights 0 No right to education more religious rights eat or not eat certain foods pray 0 Reality for prisoners I Overcrowding I Gangs in prison and ran on the outside from leaders on the inside I Rape Prison Rape Elimination Act 2003 o Guards raping women at women s prisons 0 Juvenile in Prison x Sentencing o Noncapital cases I Judge sets a sentencing hearing after the trial if the defendant is found guilty 0 Prosecutor and Defense make statements 0 Prosecutor usually asks for the maximum sentence 0 Defense reasons why the defendant shouldn t get the maximum sentence 0 Defendant and victims may make statements 0 Defendants ask or show remorse o Victims can give preferences of what they want plea bargain I Average length of hearing 5 minutes 0 Factors that predict sentence I Type of crime and factors involved I Extent of offender s past record I Status of offender between arrest amp conviction 0 Whether the defendant got bail lesser crimes have lower bail 0 People who can post bail often tend to get lower sentence I Probation officer s recommendation x Plea Bargaining Mandatory Minimum and Three Strikes Law 0 Pleas I 8595 of all criminal cases result in a plea bargain I Motivations behind plea bargaining o No parole mandatory minimums put power in the prosecutor s hands 0 Case isn t strong either side can believe this less time to take a plea bargain lower sentence 0 Three Strikes Law I 3 felony crimes and you get life without parole 0 Only about 11 of federal drug cases are high level drug dealers about 50 are low level offenders x Sentencing Guidelines o Mandatory minimum are now advisory but often followed 0 Ranking of crimes 0 Murder 43 robbery 20 blackmail 9 I Offense level conduct during offense that adds to the seriousness robbery 20 pts 0 Ex Bank gun injury restraint amount stolen total 32 points 0 Mitigating factors subtract from rank ex Cooperation guilty plea total 29 pts I Criminal history category 0 Assess defendants prior sentences length of time in prison and nearness of current offense with last offense 0 Auto theft grand larceny within 2 years 5 pts 0 Categories range from to IV 5 pts category I o Offense level of 29 and category I criminal history I Sentencing Range 0 108135 months 911 years 0 Supervised release of 35 years 0 150005150000 fines 0 100 fine per count 0 10000 restitution 0 Recent Supreme Court Decision Blaker v Washington 2004 US v Booker 2005 I quotOther than the fact of a prior conviction any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury or admitted by the defendant and proved beyond a reasonable doubt Scalia majority opinion 0 Judges are required to I Consider sentencing goals I Consider offense and offender categories I Minimize sentencing disparity I Keep sentences consistent I 10 years for one murder 25 years for another is not okay I Afford adequate deterrence I Foster victims restitution and protect the public 0 Consider rehabilitation I Alternative sentences 0 Community service 0 Low level crimes misdemeanors juveniles o Restitution o Paying back the victims of the crime 0 Shaming sentences 0 Wear a sign different license plate 0 Physical alteration 0 Chemical castration o Involuntary commitment beyond sentence I Rehabilitation 600000 prisoners released each year 67 will be rearrested 0 Education in prison 0 Community adjustment programs 0 Curfews if a rule is broken they are kicked out of the program 0 Drug rehabilitation reduces rearrest by 20 0 Principles of effective treatment 0 Target known predictors for recidivism of particular crime 0 Use cognitivebehavioral treatments 0 Focus on highrisk offenders 0 Consider characteristics of offenders that affect response to treatment IQ mental health 0 Continued contact beyond program x Death Penalty Information x Death Penalty some history 0 1972 Moratorium on Death Penalty I Furman v Georgia 1972 0 DP is unconstitutional because sentence tied to conviction 0 Guilty death penalty not guilty set free I Gregg v Georgia 1976 implemented twotrial system 0 Verdict is not tied to the sentence the sentence is later dedded o Conviction phase determine guilt o Sentencing phase determine sentence 0 Sentencing Trial aggravating prosecution and mitigating factors defense presented I Same jury as in conviction phase 0 Now constitutional I Ring v Arizona 2002 jury not judge must decide about death penalty 0 3 states have laws which allow the judge to override a jury recommendation of life 0 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act 1996 I Oklahoma City Bombing Timothy McVey I Reduced access to Habeas Corpus petitions federal appeal of state cases and limited the time of appeals to one year in p son 0 Timothy McVey dropped his appeals and asked to be executed must be tested for competency if asking to be executed 0 Jury Selection deathqualified juror o Witherspoon v Illinois 1968 I Reasons to excuse jurors in capital cases 0 Inability to render verdict based on beliefs about capital punishment 0 Zealous adherence to capital punishment I Death qualified jurors are conviction prone and more punitive 0 Additional Information I 1995 number of appeals limited to one year in state cases I Atkins v Virginia 2002 executing the mentally retarded o What is considered mental retardation 0 Each state has their own definition IQ history schooling records I Roper v Simmons 2005 executing juvenile offenders 0 Supreme Court says you must be 18 or older because of frontal lobe development I Life without parole is not present in all states 0 Ohio adopted LWOP in 1995 0 Texas adopted LWOP in 2005 x Purposes of the death penalty 0 Cost I It costs more to have the death penalty than to not have it 0 General deterrence I Will other people stop committing crime if the death penalty is in place NO 0 Incapacitation individual deterrence I Argument will he person do it again if they are released 0 Moral outragetypically from a community 0 Retribution and restitution x Factors that increase probability of getting the Death Penalty Baldus et al 0 Victim was a police officer stranger weak or frail white under 12 years old 0 Defendant committed murder for hire killed 2 people tortured raped planned to collect insurance x Factors that decrease probability 0 Victim was a family member or lover barroom fight 0 Defendant was not the trigger person was under 17 was retired student or housewife x Race and the death penalty 0 McCleskey v Kemp I Death penalty is applied arbitrarily I Baldus et al research 0 Black defendantwhite victim 21 0 White defendantwhite victim 8 0 White defendantblack victim 3 0 Black defendantblack victim 1 o Blacks who kill whites are 4 times more likely to get the death penalty 0 If a white victim 11 time more likely to get death penalty than if the victim is black 0 Supreme Court ruled that the discrepancy was valid but unless the defendant can prove that he received the death penalty because he was Black it was not unconstitutional discrimination
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'