Life in prision vs death penalty Books for reference- no articles or journal entries. One ebook attached. Others I found but could not attach if needed: ? 1.Fighting the De
Unit II Annotated Bibliography
- Weight: 11% of course grade
Instruction
Topic- Life in prision vs death penalty
Books for reference- no articles or journal entries. One ebook attached. Others I found but could not attach if needed:
1.Fighting the Death Penalty : A Fifty-Year Journey of Argument and Persuasion Eugene G. Wanger, 2017
2.The Death Penalty : What's Keeping It Alive By: Andrea D. Lyon
Follow the directions below for the completion of the Annotated Bibliography assignment for Unit II. If you have questions, please email your professor for assistance.
- Purpose: The purpose of the annotated bibliography is to summarize the sources that you have gathered to support your research proposal project. These summaries help you to think about the complex arguments presented in your sources.
- Description: In this assignment, you will create an annotated bibliography consisting of four sources. Each entry will consist of a reference list citation, a summary of the source’s information, and a one-sentence assessment. Each annotation should be between 150 to 200 words. If an entry is shorter than 150 words, it is likely you have not fully developed your summary, and this lack of development can severely impact your grade for this assignment.
- Sample attached for reference.
1
Rise and Fall of the Personal Essay in Media
Student Name
Columbia Southern University
Course Name
Instructor Name
Date
Annotated Bibliography Format Checklist
1-inch margins
Double spacing
Times New Roman (suggested)
Paragraphs indentation of .5 inch
(using Tab)
All seven references in alphabetical
order
Each annotation is 150 to 200 words
Center the title of your paper
above the first reference. 2
Rise and Fall of the Personal Essay in Media
Almanza, M., Pfizer, A., & Mousislli, H. (2016). The dread rise. Journal of Journalism Studies,
7(89), 134–152. https://doi.org/10.2597/234-4722.2016.05
First, list your
reference in
APA Style.
The
annotation, or
summary of
the source,
should begin
under the
reference.
Indent the first
line of the
paragraphs in
your
annotations.
This source is an article for the con side of the research topic. Almanza et al.
examine blogs and internet sites that allowed amateur writers to publish or self-publish
whatever stories they chose. The authors provide examples of stories as tinder for their
strong polemic on the personal essay. They also include a graph that details the start of
what they term the “dread rise,” or the rise in popularity of the personal essay; the graph
starts in 2008 and ends in late 2016. The graph will be used as a visualization of the rise
and fall of personal essays. Almanza et al. also argue that the more confessional personal
essays devalue the entire literary community by allowing writers to publish work based
on shock value instead of literary merit. They provide a few excerpts from confessional
essays that are truly absurd to thoroughly prove their point. These excerpts will be used
to argue the con part of the research paper’s argument.
Gordon, F., & Arden, D. (2014). The personal era of writing fiction, nonfiction, and everything
else. Indie Presses.
Gordon and Arden discuss how the confessional, or personal, essay has affected
nonfiction, fiction, and other genres of writing. They present two fiction and nonfiction
examples each and discuss the changes in form and diction. Examples of poetry and
feature articles are also provided and examined. Gordon and Arden believe that the rise in
personal and confessional essays affected the formal nature of writing in all genres. They
note that, societally, formality has changed writing and everything else, but there is a
3
large difference in the writing of fiction, nonfiction, poetry, and feature writing after the
resurgence of the personal essay. There was also a rise in the personal and sometimes
irrelevant information included in an attempt to get readers to engage with a particular
publication exclusively. The readerships for the publications publishing personal essays
went up, but all of them saw a huge drop off in November 2016, causing a major shift in
the editorial processes of many publishers online or otherwise. Many online publishers
closed. The examples of the different kind of writing will be used to show the differences
in the writing styles. You can also include how you will use the
source in your paper.
Ma, Y., Turoi, M., Cho, J., & Idowu, A. (2015). A study of media and journalism. Journal-
Journal, 7(2), 13–25. https://doi.org/10.559/wjp.v5.i3.2313
This is another neutral source that simply lists certain aspects of journalism that
have changed over time. The authors documented the usage of certain words and types of
writing—essays, interviews, cover stories, and others. In their study, Ma et al. noticed a
spike in personal and confessional essays in journalism around 2008 and a decline 8 years
later at the end of 2016. They speak on the reasons for this particular phenomenon and
include a number of interviews from journalists at two national news organizations and
three newspapers in Chicago, New York, and Los Angeles. The study managed to present
a balanced set of data that shows both the increase in the websites using the personal
essay boom for profit and authentic websites that were created to combat the rise of
personal essay news. This resource will be used to provide a different perspective on the
negative part of the argument.
4
Potter, H., Anders, D., Smith, C., Hash, M., Toppingham, P., Jacobson, Z., & Kim, S. (2013).
Disconnections in journalism and the personal narrative. PLoS ONE, 5(27).
https://doi.org/10.17871/journal.pone.10770 In an
annotated
bibliography,
you do not
need to cite
paraphrased
information.
It is not a
best practice
to include
directly
quoted
information
in your
annotations.
This resource was a collaboration between 37 authors that cataloged the internet’s
response to news stories from the major news outlets. The authors compared this
information to the responses garnered by the literary sites accepting the occasional new
worthy submission. Many of the websites specializing in showcasing creative writing
genres received an influx of stories that were personal essays but contained news
elements and angles not often taken by the national news outlets. Because of the influx of
this kind of prose, the sites started to publish them; from there they gained traction and
ballooned the viewership of these sites. Potter et al. mention that at the height of this
boom, the actual news content dwindled, and the confessional nature of them became
alternative for the sake of readers and hits. This resource will be used to highlight the
negative impact the confession essay wave had on news in general.
5
Wong, P. S. (2016). Love for the confessional nature. Current Lit, 12(4), 23–27.
https://doi.org/10.3847/co.23.2935
Wong argues that confessing is part of the human condition as much as lying, and
it is cathartic to write in such a manner. She cites the restorative effects of journaling as
indicator of this and provides statistics that show the correlation between journaling and
improved mood. Wong uses this data to stress the importance of the confessional nature
of the more recent personal essays, and denounces critics of it. She does side with the
critics on one point, however. She agrees that there is a place for the confessional or
personal essay. While it is important to confess, Wong mentions that audiences should
not become stand-in priests; too much of the confessional essays can sink a career. This is
what she says happened when the stock in personal essays fell. People were tired of
reading purely personal information and started to switch to more informational reading
material.
Remember that the purpose of the assignment is to summarize the source you have
gathered for your research paper in your own words, so directly quoted material is not
required. You will not need to provide your opinions or personal experience. Present
the information relevant to your research paper topic in 150-200 words.
,
C o p y r i g h t 2 0 1 2 . N Y U P r e s s . A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d . M a y n o t b e r e p r o d u c e d i n a n y f o r m w i t h o u t p e r m i s s i o n f r o m t h e p u b l i s h e r , e x c e p t f a i r
u s e s p e r m i t t e d u n d e r U . S . o r a p p l i c a b l e c o p y r i g h t l a w .
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) – printed on 3/27/2023 1:43 PM via COLUMBIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY AN: 457464 ; Charles J. Ogletree, Jr, Austin Sarat.; Life Without Parole : America's New Death Penalty? Account: s3921192
Life without Parole
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/27/2023 1:43 PM via COLUMBIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
The Charles Hamilton Houston Institu te Series on Race and Justice
The Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice at Harvard Law School seeks to further the vision of racial justice and equality through research, policy analysis, litigation, and scholarship, and will place a special emphasis on the issues of voting rights, the future of affirmative action, the criminal justice system, and related areas.
From Lynch Mobs to the Killing State: Race and the Death Penalty in America
Edited by Charles J. Ogletree, Jr., and Austin Sarat
When Law Fails: Making Sense of Miscarriages of Justice Edited by Charles J. Ogletree, Jr., and Austin Sarat
The Road to Abolition? The Future of Capital Punishment in the United States
Edited by Charles J. Ogletree, Jr., and Austin Sarat
Life without Parole: America’s New Death Penalty? Edited by Charles J. Ogletree, Jr., and Austin Sarat
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/27/2023 1:43 PM via COLUMBIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
Life without Parole
America’s New Death Penalty?
Edited by Charles J. Ogletree, Jr., and Austin Sarat
a N E W Y O R K U N I V E R S I T Y P R E S S New York and London
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/27/2023 1:43 PM via COLUMBIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
NEW YORK UNIVERSITY PRESS New York and London www.nyupress.org
© 2012 by New York University All rights reserved
References to Internet websites (URLs) were accurate at the time of writing. Neither the author nor New York University Press is responsible for URLs that may have expired or changed since the manuscript was prepared.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Life without parole : America›s new death penalty? / [edited by] Charles J. Ogletree, Jr., Austin Sarat. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-8147-6247-9 (hardback) ISBN 978-0-8147-6248-6 (pb) ISBN 978-0-8147-6249-3 (ebook) 1. Parole — United States. 2. Life imprisonment — United States. 3. Capital punishment — United States. I. Ogletree, Charles J. II. Sarat, Austin. KF9750.L54 2012 364.6’5 — dc23 2012005678
New York University Press books are printed on acid-free paper, and their binding materials are chosen for strength and durability. We strive to use environmentally responsible suppliers and materials to the greatest extent possible in publishing our books.
Manufactured in the United States of America
c 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 p 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/27/2023 1:43 PM via COLUMBIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
To Pam, for your enduring support of the many challenging efforts I pursue. You are the greatest. (C.O.)
To Ben, with hope that you will grow up in a more forgiving and humane world. (A.S.)
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/27/2023 1:43 PM via COLUMBIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
This page intentionally left blank
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/27/2023 1:43 PM via COLUMBIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
| vii
Contents
Acknowledgments ix Introduction: Lives on the Line: From Capital Punishment 1 to Life without Parole Charles J. Ogletree, Jr., and Austin Sarat
Pa rt I : L i f e w i t h o u t Pa ro l e i n C o n t e xt 1 Mandatory Life and the Death of Equitable Discretion 25 Josh Bowers 2 Death-in-Prison Sentences: Overutilized and Underscrutinized 66 Jessica S. Henry 3 Creating the Permanent Prisoner 96 Sharon Dolovich 4 Life without Parole under Modern Theories of Punishment 138 Paul H. Robinson
Pa rt I I : Pro spe c t s f o r Re f o r m 5 Defending Life 167 I. Bennett Capers 6 Life without Parole and the Hope for Real Sentencing Reform 190 Rachel E. Barkow 7 No Way Out? Life Sentences and the Politics of Penal Reform 227 Marie Gottschalk 8 Dignity and Risk: The Long Road from Graham v. Florida 282 to Abolition of Life without Parole Jonathan Simon
About the Contributors 311
Index 313
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/27/2023 1:43 PM via COLUMBIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
This page intentionally left blank
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/27/2023 1:43 PM via COLUMBIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
| ix
Acknowledgments
The work contained in this book was first presented at a conference at Amherst College on December 3–4, 2010. We are grateful to our contribu- tors for their fine work and commitment to our project and to Matthew Brew- ster and Heather Richard for their skilled research assistance. The December 2010 conference initiated an annual series of meetings jointly sponsored by Amherst College’s Charles Hamilton Houston Forum on Law and Social Jus- tice and Harvard Law School’s Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice. We are grateful for the opportunity to honor Houston for his singular contributions to America’s continuing quest for justice and equality.
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/27/2023 1:43 PM via COLUMBIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
This page intentionally left blank
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/27/2023 1:43 PM via COLUMBIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
| 1
Introduction
Lives on the Line: From Capital Punishment to Life without Parole
C ha r l e s J . O g l et r e e , J r . , a n d Au s t i n S a r at
Death, in its finality, differs more from life imprisonment than a 100-year prison term differs from one of only a year or two.
—Justice Stewart, Woodson v. North Carolina
Life without parole is a very strange sentence when you think about it. The punishment seems either too much or too little. If a sadistic or extraordinarily cold, callous killer deserves to die, then why not kill him? But if we are going to keep the killer alive when we could otherwise execute him, why strip him of all hope?
—Robert Blecker, quoted in Adam Liptak, “Serving Life with No Chance of Redemption,” New York Times, October 5, 2005
Writing in October 2005, New York Times reporter Adam Liptak observed that “in just the last 30 years, the United States has created something never before seen in its history and unheard of around the globe: a booming population of prisoners whose only way out of prison is likely to be inside a coffin. . . . Driven by tougher laws and political pressure on governors and parole boards, thousands of lifers are going into prisons each year, and in many states only a few are ever coming out, even in cases where judges and prosecutors did not intend to put them away forever.”1 In fact, in every decade over the last third of the 20th century, at least eight states joined the list of those authorizing sen- tences of life without parole (LWOP) as part of their criminal code (see figure I.1).
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/27/2023 1:43 PM via COLUMBIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
2 | Charles J. Ogletree, Jr., and Austin Sarat
Fig. I.1. State enactment of LWOP statutes in the United States over time. Source: Steven Mulroy, “Avoiding ‘Death by Default’: Does the Constitution Require a ‘Life without Parole’ Alternative to the Death Penalty?,” 79 Tulane Law Review (2005): 450n. 32.
As a result of these legislative changes, LWOP sentences increased expo- nentially.2 Between 1992 and 2008, the LWOP population in the United States increased 230%,3 so that today more prisoners are serving life terms than ever before (see figure I.2).4
Yet life sentences in general, and LWOP in particular, are by no means new to the American experience. LWOP has been a feature of American penal practice for almost a century. Some of its earliest uses are found in habitual criminal statutes, today known as “three-strike laws.” For example, Ohio’s 1929 habitual criminal statute provided that those sentenced “serve a term of his or her natural life.”5 Such statutes have been a significant source of the recent growth in the LWOP population. Thus, “Alabama’s habitual offender statute caused the ‘life without possibility of parole’ population to increase by an average of 277 persons per year between 1981 and 1986.”6 Table I.1 summarizes current three-strike laws, the felonies they include, and the number of people sentenced to LWOP under them. Only states with three- strike laws that mandate LWOP are represented.
In addition to LWOP’s early, and continuing, association with habitual criminal statutes, it has, since the middle of the 20th century, been used regularly as a sentence in murder cases.7 Indeed one of the most conspicu- ous factors in the growth of LWOP as a sentence in those cases has been an alliance of death penalty abolitionists and conservative, tough-on-crime politicians. For abolitionists, life without parole, as James Liebman notes,
1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/27/2023 1:43 PM via COLUMBIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
Introduction | 3
Fig. I.2. Growth in LWOP population in the United States, 1984–2008. Sources: Figures from 1984: Donald Macdonald and Leonard Morgenbersser, “Life without Parole Statutes in the United States,” NYS Department of Correctional Services, Division of Program Planning, Research, and Evaluation, 1984; figures from 1992: Kathleen McGuire and Ann L. Pastore, eds., Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics 1992, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1993; figures from 2003: Marc Mauer, Ryan S. King, and Malcolm C. Young, “The Mean- ing of ‘Life’: Long Prison Sentences in Context,” Sentencing Project, May 2004; figures from 2008: Ashley Nellis and Ryan King, “No Exit: The Expanding Use of Life Sentences in America,” Sentencing Project, 2009.
“has been absolutely crucial to whatever progress has been made against the death penalty. The drop in death sentences [from 320 in 1996 to 125 in 2004] would not have happened without LWOP.”8 Or, as Liptak writes, the growth of LWOP “is in some ways an artifact of the death penalty. Opponents of cap- ital punishment have promoted life sentences as an alternative to execution. And as the nation’s enthusiasm for the death penalty wanes amid restrictive Supreme Court rulings and a spate of death row exonerations, more states are turning to life sentences.”9
For some advocates of LWOP, it is a milder alternative to the unique harshness of capital punishment. As one oft-repeated phrase puts it, “death is different.” For death penalty abolitionists, the availability of LWOP as an alternative sanction for serious crimes can be a powerful tool in arguing against morally fraught state killing. A recent poll found that 70% of Cali- fornians are in favor of the death penalty.10 Offered LWOP as an alternative, however, only 41% favored the death penalty for first-degree murder.11 Strong majoritarian support for capital punishment, this seems to suggest, can be undermined effectively by upholding LWOP as a viable alternative.
For strict retributivists, on the other hand, precisely because “death is dif- ferent,” capital punishment is the sole appropriate response to certain crimes, such as murder.12 However, while justice sometimes requires death, it also
1984 1992 2003 2008
45,000
40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/27/2023 1:43 PM via COLUMBIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
4 | Charles J. Ogletree, Jr., and Austin Sarat
Ta b l e I . 1 State Three-Strike Laws Requiring Mandatory LWOP
State “Strike Zone” Number of Strikes
Number Sentenced
Georgia Murder, armed robbery, kidnapping, rape, aggravated child molesting, aggravated sodomy, aggravated sexual battery
Two
Any felony* Four 7,631** Indiana Murder, rape, sexual battery with a weapon,
child molesting, arson, robbery, burglary with a weapon or resulting in serious injury, drug dealing
Three 38
Louisiana Murder, attempted murder, manslaughter, rape, armed robbery, kidnapping, serious drug offenses, serious felony offenses,
Three N/A
Any four felony convictions with at least one on the above list
Four
Maryland Murder, rape, robbery, first- or second-degree sexual offense, arson, burglary, kidnapping, carjacking, manslaughter, use of firearm in felony, assault with intent to murder, rape, rob, or commit sexual offense; separate prison terms required for each offense
Four 330
Montana Deliberate homicide, aggravated kidnapping, sexual intercourse without consent, ritual abuse of a minor
Two 0
Mitigated deliberate homicide, aggravated assault, kidnapping, robbery
Three
New Jersey Murder, robbery, carjacking Three 10 North Carolina
47 violent felonies; separate indictment and finding that offender is “violent habitual offender”
Three 22
South Carolina
Murder, voluntary manslaughter, homicide by child abuse, rape, kidnapping, armed robbery, drug trafficking, embezzlement, bribery, certain accessory and attempted offenses
Two 14
Tennessee Murder, aggravated kidnapping, robbery, arson, rape, rape of child; prior prison term required
Two 14
Same as above, plus rape, aggravated sexual bat- tery; separate prison terms required
Three
Utah Any first- or second-degree felony Three N/A
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/27/2023 1:43 PM via COLUMBIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
Introduction | 5
State “Strike Zone” Number of Strikes
Number Sentenced
Virginia Murder, kidnapping, robbery, carjacking, sexual assault, conspiracy with these crimes
Three 328
Washington Murder, manslaughter, rape, child molesta- tion, robbery, aggravated assault, explosion with threat to humans, extortion, kidnapping, vehicular assault, arson, attempted arson, bur- glary, any felony with deadly weapon, treason, prompting prostitution, leading organized crime
Three 209
Wisconsin Murder, manslaughter, vehicular homicide, aggravated battery, abuse of children, robbery, sexual assault, taking hostages, kidnapping, arson, burglary
Three 9
Federal government
Murder, voluntary manslaughter, assault with intent to commit murder or rape, robbery, aggravated sexual abuse, abusive sexual contact, kidnapping, aircraft piracy, carjacking, extor- tion, arson, firearms use, serious drug crimes
Three 35
* In Georgia, any four felonies mandate a maximum sentence, not necessarily LWOP. ** This statistic includes all those sentences in the scheme described just above; thus,
the true LWOP is not known for certain. All sentence statistics as of 2004. Source: Jennifer Walsh, Three Strikes Laws (Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2007), 120.
demands gradations of punishment. “If we more nearly matched crime with punishment,” argues noted retributivist Robert Blecker, “we would design a pain-free death for those who killed their victims painlessly, while reserving a painful death for those who sadistically tortured their victims.”13 Collapsing these fine gradations of punishment into a single punishment, either death or life without parole, would, in this line of thinking, be a betrayal of justice.
While conservative support for LWOP seems consistent with a tough-on- crime politics,14 support for LWOP among abolitionists requires some expla- nation. Part of their rationale for advocating LWOP rested on public opinion polls that showed support for capital punishment to be based, in part, on worries about the premature parole of violent felons. And what is true for the general public also seems to be true for jurors. John Blume et al., reporting on their research on capital juries, note that “future dangerousness is on the
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/27/2023 1:43 PM via COLUMBIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
6 | Charles J. Ogletree, Jr., and Austin Sarat
minds of most capital jurors, and is thus ‘at issue’ in virtually all capital tri- als, no matter what the prosecution says or does not say.”15 Between 53% and 66% of jurors surveyed stated that the deliberations focused a “fair amount” on the issue of future dangerousness. Additionally, among those surveyed from cases in which the prosecution did not put future dangerousness at issue, 77% reported that personal concern that the defendant might again be a harm to society was important in how they voted.16
Abolitionists support LWOP to allay those worries. Some abolitionists have even gone so far as to argue that not allowing juries to consider LWOP in the sentencing phase of capital trials is unconstitutional.17 They claim that “the absence of an LWOP option causes the death penalty to be imposed as an expedient rather than as the product of a reasoned judgment that death is the appropriate punishment.”18 They believe that without an LWOP option jurors are offered a forced choice, a choice with a bias toward death. This
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.