Attention Serial Killers: Open Season on New York
The New York Court of Appeals, which is the highest court in the state, has overturned the death penalty (PDF) in that state by a 4-3 margin. Thus far I’ve only skimmed the case, but based on what I’ve gleaned from it, and from the Newsday story (h/t: Drudge) reporting on it, it seems that the ruling was based on an unusual aspect of New York’s law, which would have mandated life with the possibility of parole in the event that the jury could not unanimously agree to recommend either death or life without parole. The constitutional objection (which was based on a provision of the New York constitution, and therefore cannot be appealed) appears to be the coercive nature of this rule, as it may pressure some jurors to join the pro-death majority rather than run the risk that a killer may be allowed out on parole later on.
My tenative view is that the court’s ruling is unfortunate, but understandable at least to the extent that the objection applies to the actually sentences and not just to the jury instructions that make the jury aware of them. Personally, I think death sentences should be mandatory under certain circumstances, but the U.S. Supreme Court has prohibited that for decades. New York’s weird statute doesn’t make a death sentence mandatory, but it does have a coercive effect that may have the effect of forcing a death sentence in some close cases. If there is a coherent reason why anyone should be sentenced to life with parole solely because the jury couldn’t agree whether or not life without parole was enough, I have yet to hear it.
