Texas Government 2306-Unit 8 lecture notes
THE COURT SYSTEM IN TEXAS
Most Americans hold two conflicting views of the appropriate role of the courts in
our democracy. Most citizens believe the court system should be above politics. At the
same time, many Americans expect the courts to be responsive to the electorate, not
realizing the incompatibility of those two expectations. In reality, the decision making of
the courts differs significantly from that of the executive and legislative branches.
Courts must be passive by nature, waiting for a case to come to them. They follow
rules that restrict access to the courts. The courts cannot initiate legal action, but must
instead wait until parties who have "standing" file a lawsuit. Judges will follow strict
rules of procedure, particularly the rule of "stare decisis"-- basing their decisions on
precedent as much as possible. Lastly, the courts generally confine their decisions to
the specifics of the case before them and attempt to maintain the appearance of
objectivity. As such, the courts play the role of final arbitrators of conflict.
There are two types of state courts: trial courts and appellate courts. The trial
courts have original jurisdiction, the authority to hear the case at the outset.
Appellate courts exercise appellate jurisdiction, the authority to review the decisions
handed down by a lower court. In Texas, the trial courts include the justice of the
peace, municipal courts, and county-level courts for misdemeanors and minor civil
cases, and the district courts for felonies and more important civil matters. The
appellate courts include the county courts for appeals de novo from lower courts or on
the record from municipal courts of record, fourteen courts of appeals that handle both
civil and criminal cases and two supreme courts: the Texas Supreme Court with final
jurisdiction in civil matters and the Court of Criminal Appeals with final jurisdiction in
criminal cases.
There are five methods of judge selection used around the nation, each with their
own advantages and disadvantages. These five methods are partisan elections,
nonpartisan elections, appointment by the governor, selection by the legislature, and the
"merit system" or "Missouri system." With the exception of municipal judges who
are appointed by the mayor or city council, all state judges in Texas are elected in
partisan elections. However, the judge selection process in Texas might be more
appropriately termed the "appointive-elective" system because many judges in Texas
have historically received their first judgeship by appointment, county judges by the
county commissioners court and district and appellate judges by the governor
The legal system includes two types of cases: civil cases--those between
individual citizens that involve an alleged wrong committed, but no guilt, and criminal
cases--violations of the law or crimes against society. Two types of juries are involved
in the legal process. The grand jury reviews evidence presented by a prosecuting
attorney and decides whether sufficient evidence exists to indict the suspect and take
81
Texas Government 2306-Unit 8 lecture notes
him or her to trial. The petit jury sits in the courtroom, listens to the evidence, and
determines innocence or guilt.
Texas seems to practice a policy of being "tough on criminals," reflecting the
belief of most Texans that a strong deterrence is the most effective crime-fighting policy.
Texas has the highest incarceration rate of any state or Western industrialized nation
and is the leading state in both sentencing people to death and the number of prisoners
executed. This is a reflection of our traditionalistic political subculture. However,
despite this "tough on criminals" policy, Texas ranks fifth among the fifty states
in total crimes committed per 100,000 population. That should raise questions
about the crime-fighting policies Texas utilizes, but Texans still seem eager to build
more prisons and execute more prisoners rather than seriously consider alternative
strategies that might more effectively reduce crime. With finite resources and many
other competing needs in the state, the time may soon come when the state will be
forced to alter its crime-fighting strategy.
KEY TERMS
advisory opinion: a legal opinion issued by the Texas attorney general, at the request
of a legislator, on the constitutionality of a bill under consideration. While technically
having no legal force, if the opinion is that the bill is unconstitutional, that usually kills
any chances that the bill will pass the Texas legislature.
appellate courts: courts that possess only appellate jurisdiction, the power to hear
cases on appeal from lower courts and decide points of law, not points of fact; in Texas
these include the fourteen courts of appeals with eighty judges.
appellate jurisdiction: the power to review the decisions of a lower court. (Such
appeals do not involve a new trial but simply a review of the law as it was applied in the
original trial.
civil cases: cases involving a dispute between two parties and involve the idea of
responsibility, not guilt.
constitutional county courts: established in each of the 254 counties in Texas by the
state constitution, which determines their jurisdiction.
county courts at law: courts created in larger urban counties by an act of the
legislature; they replace the constitutional county court in the counties they operate in.
criminal cases: cases brought against individuals for violations of law--crimes against
society.
district courts: the major trial courts in the state, hearing major criminal (felony) and
civil cases.
dual court system: Texas’s judicial system of having two high courts—the Texas
Supreme Court—the highest court for civil cases—and the Court of Criminal Appeals—
the highest court for criminal cases.
grand jury: a jury that decides whether to indict or formally charge and bring to trial a
suspect; used as a screening mechanism to prevent arbitrary actions by prosecutors.
magistrate/minor courts: courts, which hear, cases involving misdemeanors and
minor civil matters; in Texas these are justice of the peace and municipal courts.
82
Texas Government 2306-Unit 8 lecture notes
merit system/Missouri system: a method of judge selection that involves the governor
appointing judges from a list submitted by a screening committee of legal officials; after
appointment, the judge serves a set term and is then subjected to a retention election
(where the judge has no opponent and voters simply vote yes or no as to retain or
remove the judge).
original jurisdiction: the power to try a case being heard for the first time
petit jury: the trial jury that determines guilt or innocence of the defendant and may
decide the punishment.
plea bargaining: the defendant pleading guilty to a lesser charge in exchange for a
lesser sentence agreed to by the accused and the prosecuting attorney
standing: a rule of the courts that for an individual to file a lawsuit, the case must
involve a real controversy between two parties and someone must have suffered real
damage.
stare decisis: a Latin term that literally means "to stand that which has been decided
before;" a common-law doctrine that once a case has been decided, subsequent cases
with similar facts should receive similar decisions by following the earlier precedent.
supreme courts: courts of last resort; in Texas there are two--the Texas Supreme
Court for civil cases and the Court of Criminal Appeals for criminal cases.
trial de novo courts: courts that keep no record of the proceedings (all justice of the
peace and most municipal courts in Texas).
Structure of the Texas Court System
This discussion starts with the lowest court(s) and works its way up to the two highest
courts in Texas—The Court of Criminal Appeals and the Texas Supreme Court. (See
diagram on next page for structure of the Texas court system.)
 Municipal Courts
These are the city courts of Texas. Terms, salaries, and qualifications for
municipal judges vary across the state. Municipal courts have criminal
jurisdiction to hear violations of city ordinances. Most of them are not courts of
record, requiring that appeals from them require a trial de novo. 84% of the
cases are Class C misdemeanors dealing with traffic violations with fines up to
$500.
 Justice of the Peace Courts
Each Texas county is required to have at least one and nor more than 8 justice of
the peace (J.P.) courts. The county commissioners draw these up and the voters
in each precinct elect justices to a 4-year term. The only qualification for holding
office is to be a registered voter! J.P. courts have criminal jurisdiction in Class C
misdemeanors with fines up to $500 and civil jurisdiction in cases involving less
than $5,000. J.P.s also function as magistrate, notary public, and coroner in
counties with no medical examiner. They can also perform marriages and
83
Texas Government 2306-Unit 8 lecture notes





preside over small claims courts. Most criminal cases in J.P. courts involve
traffic violations. There were 835 J.P. courts in Texas as of 2001.
County Courts
Every county has a “constitutional county court”, presided over by a county judge
who is elected to a 4-year term. The only qualification is to be “well informed in
the law”!! County courts hear civil cases involving $200-$5,000 probate cases,
and Class A and B misdemeanor criminal cases. The constitutional county judge
has other administrative duties, the most important of which is presiding over the
county’s commissioners’ court. To relieve this workload, the legislature created
187 county courts-at-law and probate courts. These courts have specialized
jurisdiction and their judges are generally more qualified than a constitutional
county judge. County courts at law have civil jurisdiction in cases under
$100,000. As of 2001 there were 254 county courts, 195 county courts at law,
and 16 probate courts in Texas.
District Courts
There are 418 district courts in Texas. These are the major trial courts in the
state and have both criminal and civil jurisdiction (3/4 of their cases are civil
cases.) All felony cases begin at the district court. They also hear civil cases
involving $200 or more. District judges are elected to 4-year terms and must be
at least 25 years old with four years experience as a lawyer or judge. District
courts in urban counties usually specialize as either criminal or civil courts. Each
county in Texas must have at least one court designated as a juvenile court and
in most counties the district court carries out this function.
Courts of Appeals
Texas has 14 intermediate appellate courts, which hear cases originating in the
courts within their “supreme judicial district.” They have both criminal and civil
jurisdiction. These courts are multi-judge panels whose members are elected to
staggered 6-year terms. Qualifications are the same as for the Supreme Court
level. Most criminal appeals end at this level.
Court of Criminal Appeals
This is the highest appeals court for criminal cases. The nine judges on the court
are elected to staggered 6-year terms. Qualifications are the same as for the
Supreme Court. The Court of Criminal Appeals is the highest court for
criminal cases in Texas. All death penalty appeals go directly the Court of
Criminal Appeals (thus bypassing the Courts of Appeals.)
Texas Supreme Court
The Texas Supreme Court is the highest court for civil cases only
And has only limited original jurisdiction. In addition to hearing appeals, the court
issues rules of civil procedure and licenses lawyers to practice in Texas. This
court is composed of nine justices who are elected to staggered 6-year terms. A
justice must be 35 years old, a U.S. and Texas citizen, and a lawyer and/or courtof-record judge for 10 years.
84
Texas Government 2306-Unit 8 lecture notes
85
Texas Government 2306-Unit 8 lecture notes
The Five Methods of Judge Selection used in the United
States &
The Method Used in Texas, and the Advantages and
Disadvantages of Each.
A.
APPOINTMENT BY THE EXECUTIVE
1.
Seven of the original thirteen states provide for some judges to be
appointed by the governor and serve for life
2.
When judicial selection is by gubernatorial appointment, there is greater
potential for the selection of judges who are competent
3.
However, it may not always ensure competence because governors may
use judicial appointments to reward friends and repay political debts
4.
Also, most governors, as do U.S. presidents, have used their appointive
powers to select judges who share their political philosophy, which has
sometimes raised questions of judicial competence
5.
Senatorial courtesy, which allows U.S. senators to limit the president's
choices for appointment to federal district courts, can also influence
gubernatorial appointments to the state judiciary
6.
While governors are unlikely to select unqualified people for judicial
appointments, it does not necessarily lead to the appointment of the most
competent persons
7.
Another criticism is that once appointed by the governor, the judges are
not responsive to voters and can exercise great independence in their
decisions
B.
APPOINTMENT BY THE LEGISLATURE
1.
Four states of the original thirteen states allow the legislature to select the
judges
2.
Appointment by the legislature is a system left over from colonial America
3.
This system tends to lead to the selection of former legislators as judges
4.
The party that controls the state legislature tends to select judges that
belong to their party, making political party loyalty somewhat more
important than competence
C.
PARTISAN ELECTIONS
1.
Thirteen states use partisan elections to select some or all of their state
judges
2.
Judicial candidates must first run in a party primary and then, if they win
the primary, must run in the general election
86
Texas Government 2306-Unit 8 lecture notes
3.
4.
5.
Partisan elections do have the advantage of leading to greater
responsiveness of judges to the public
However, critics charge and, the data seems to indicate, that partisan
elections can often lead to poorly qualified judges being elected because
voters vote the straight-party ticket or vote for the most familiar name on
the ballot regardless of merit
Another criticism is that judges are less independent and impartial in this
method of selection because of the influence of large campaign
contributions, often given by law firms and interests who will have cases
pending before the court.
D.
NONPARTISAN ELECTIONS
1.
Twenty one states use nonpartisan elections to choose some or all of their
state judges
2.
In nonpartisan elections the judicial candidates run without any party
affiliation indicated on the ballot
3.
Nonpartisan elections often reduce the cost of campaigns because
candidates do not have to run and win a primary election to be on the
ballot in the general election
4.
Nonpartisan elections also have the advantage of eliminating the problem
of straight-ticket voting
5.
Nonpartisan elections force the voters to base their decision on something
other than a party label
6.
While this method of judge selection would not necessarily result in the
selection of more competent judges, it would probably prevent the kind of
large-scale changes that occurred in Harris County in 1994, due to
straight-ticket voting
E.
THE MERIT OR MISSOURI SYSTEM
1.
Twenty one states use some version of the "merit" or "Missouri
system" to elect some judges
2.
The merit or Missouri system allows the governor to appoint judges from a
list submitted by a screening committee of legal officials
3.
After appointment, the judge serves for a set term and then must run in a
retention election
4.
The retention election allows the voters to simply vote "yes" or "no" as to
whether the judge remains in office--a majority of yes votes means the
judges serves another term and a majority of no votes means the
selection process begins anew
5.
In these retention elections the judges run unopposed
6.
Advocates of this method of judge selection argue that it leads to more
competent judges being selected and keeps the judges responsive to the
public because they must face voters in the retention election
87
Texas Government 2306-Unit 8 lecture notes
7.
8.
F.
Critics allege that there is little evidence that it results in the selection of
more competent judges (although it probably screens out the incompetent
or poorly qualified)
Critics also charge that there is no evidence it leads to judge
responsiveness to public opinion because the judge has no opponent in
the retention election and it is difficult to defeat someone with no one;
most judges are retained, with less then 1 percent ever removed
JUDGE SELECTION IN TEXAS
1.
In Texas all appellate court judges are elected in partisan elections for sixyear terms and all trial court judges are elected in partisan elections for
four-year terms
2.
The exceptions to this are the municipal court judges, who are appointed
by the mayor or city council
3.
Some observers argue that in reality Texas has an "appointiveelective" judge selection system
4.
This is because the governor can fill any vacancy in a district or appellate
court that results from death, resignation, or new district court positions
created by the legislature (vacancies in county courts are filled by the
governing body, the county commissioners court)
5.
Persons appointed to fill vacancies serve until the next regular election for
that office, when they then must run for reelection
6.
Historically, many (some argue most) judges in Texas have received their
first judgeship through appointment by the governor
a.
from 1940 to 1962, about 66 percent of the district and appellate
judges were appointed by the governor to their first term on the
court
b.
In 1976, 150 district judges were appointed, and in 1984, 64
percent were appointed to their first term
c.
In 1995, 38 percent of appellate court judges and 48 percent of
district court judges were appointed by the governor to their initial
seat on the court
7.
This is because many judges, knowing they are about to retire and take
another position, will resign before the end of their term to allow the
governor to fill the vacancy
8.
Judges do this because they have more faith in the governor selecting
their replacement than they do the voters choosing from two new names
on the ballot
9.
Critics of the current judge selection method in Texas point out the many
problems are created by using the existing system
88
Texas Government 2306-Unit 8 lecture notes
a.
b.
c.
Most voters have little knowledge about the qualifications of judicial
candidates and often end up voting for the most familiar name--two
examples exist of this
(1)
In 1976, voters elected Don Yarbrough to the Texas
Supreme Court even though he was an unknown attorney
who won the Democratic nomination and after he claimed
that God had told him to run; many voters thought he was
either Don Yarborough, who ran unsuccessfully for governor
or Ralph Yarbrough, who had served for two terms in the
U.S. Senate (Yarbrough was forced to resign after about six
months on the bench because criminal charges were filed
against him; he was later convicted of perjury and sentenced
to five years in jail, but jumped bond, fled to Grenada, and
was later arrested in the Virgin Islands and returned to
Texas to serve time in prison)
(2)
In 1990 and 1996, Gene Kelly won the Democratic party
primary for a seat on the Texas Supreme Court because
some voters thought he was the famous dancer and film star
from the 1950s and 1960s (Kelly, who lost in the general
election, was a retired Air Force judge with little nonmilitary
experience)
Another problem is straight-ticket voting, which led to many
Democratic incumbents losing their judgeships in large urban
counties to unknown Republican challengers, many of whom
lacked judicial experience and one who had no courtroom
experience
(1)
In 1994 in Harris County, only one incumbent Democrat was
reelected and sixteen were defeated by the Republican
candidates who often lacked judicial experience
(2)
In 1994, Steve Mansfield, with very limited legal experience
and no experience in criminal law, was elected to the Texas
Court of Criminal Appeals, the highest court for criminal
cases in Texas
A third issue raised is the effect of campaign contributions on the
judges, who must win both a party primary and a general election
(1)
In 1984, Chief Justice John Hill spent over $1 million to win
the chief justice race
(2)
In 1988 one candidate for the Supreme Court spend over $2
million
(3)
The campaign contributions often come from law firms who
have business before the judges who receive the money
89
Texas Government 2306-Unit 8 lecture notes
(4)
9.
G.
Other money comes from interest groups, such as the Texas
Medical Association, which has an interest in limiting
malpractice tort claims in cases before the courts
Because of the problems and questions raised about judicial selection in
Texas, in 1995 the Texas Supreme Court established the Commission
on Judicial Efficiency to make recommendations on the method of
judicial selection, and other issues, to the 1997 session of the Texas
Legislature
CONCLUSIONS
1.
The method of judge selection also varies between courts within some
states
2.
For example, in some states, appellate court judges are chosen by merit
system and trial court judges are elected by the voters
3.
Most states have gradually moved away from partisan election of judges
and use either a nonpartisan election system or the merit/Missouri system
4.
Each method has its strengths and weaknesses, although some methods
do seem to be better than others
5.
In conclusion, there is really no perfect system for selecting judges
6.
Most states do have some system to remove judges for misconduct or
good cause
a.
Forty three states use the impeachment process
b.
Five states allow for recall of judges by the voters
c.
One state, New Hampshire, allows the governor to remove a judge
after a hearing
d.
Forty nine states have established judicial conduct commissions to
handle such issues of judge misconduct
How Texas Judges May be Removed or Disciplined


District and appellate court judges may be removed from the bench by
impeachment after a vote of 2/3 majority of the legislature. The Texas Supreme
Court may also remove district judges. The Texas Supreme Court has the
authority to conduct proceedings for the removal of district judges. Lower court
judges may be removed by action of a district court.
A 1965 constitutional amendment established a 12-member Texas State
Commission on Judicial Conduct that is authorized to hear complaints against
any judge in the state and to censure, reprimand, or recommend removal by the
Texas Supreme Court. However, punishment of judges is a rare occurrence and
happens only after some flagrant violation of ethical standards has been
committed.
90
Texas Government 2306-Unit 8 lecture notes

In 1999, Margaret Reaves became the new executive director of the State
Commission on Judicial Conduct. Under her direction, the commission began to
notify the media when it rebuked a misbehaving judge. Faced with having to
undergo media exposure of inappropriate or unethical behavior, many judges
prefer to resign rather than contest the issue.
Crime and punishment in Texas and critique the crimefighting strategy used in Texas, including the death penalty.
A.
NATIONAL AND STATE CRIME STATISTICS
1.
Crime rates and violent crime rates rose dramatically during the 1960s
and have increased steadily from 1979 through 1992
2.
Although crime has increased, the increase is not as great as the news
media or campaign rhetoric leads the public to believe
3.
Violent crime has increased in Texas more than in the nation as a whole
4.
Texas ranks fifth among the fifty states in total crimes committed per
100,000 population
5.
Crime in Texas generally increased between 1984 and 1989, and has
decreased somewhat since that time
6.
Many factors contribute to the crime rate
a.
More crimes are committed in larger cities and in comparing the
fifty states, there is a strong correlation between the percentage of
the population living in urban (metropolitan) areas and crime rates
b.
This partly explains the Texas crime rate, since about 80 percent of
the population in Texas lives in metropolitan areas
c.
There is also a strong correlation between age, sex, and crime
d.
Almost 46 percent of the crime is committed by people below 25
years of age
e.
Almost 82 percent of all crimes are committed by males
f.
Race is also a factor in crime
g.
African Americans constitute about 12 percent of the U.S.
population, but constitute almost 30 percent of the persons arrested
for crime (some argue that the key factor is not race, but
socioeconomic status--more blacks are of lower socioeconomic
status)
h.
In Texas, the number of young men between 18 and 24 has
declined in recent years, contributing to the lower crime rate since
1989 in Texas
91
Texas Government 2306-Unit 8 lecture notes
B.
THE POLICY OF INCARCERATION
1.
Texas has the highest rate of incarceration of any state or Western
industrialized nation--the Texas philosophy is if "you do the crime, you do
the time"
a.
Texas incarcerates 636 prisoners per 100,000 population
b.
Michigan is next with 428 per 100,000
c.
The U.S. incarceration average is 387 per 100,000
d.
For comparison purposes, here are some incarceration statistics for
other Western industrialized nations
(1)
Canada at 116 per 100,000
(2)
Mexico at 97 per 100,000
(3)
England at 93 per 100,000
(4)
Spain at 90 per 100,000
(5)
France at 84 per 100,000
(6)
Italy and Germany at 80 per 100,000
2.
The Texas philosophy is that being tougher on criminals--more
incarceration--will lead to a reduction in crime rates
3.
The fact that Texas leads the nation with the highest incarceration rate
and ranks fifth among the fifty states in terms of total crimes committed
per 100,000 population raises questions as to the validity of that
philosophy
4.
Studies in Texas do show that between 1989 and 1993, when the
incarceration rate increased by 4 percent in Texas, the crime rate dropped
by 1 percent
5.
Even if no other factors affecting crime rates were involved (and that is
untrue), critics point out that this is a high cost for such a small reduction
in crime
C.
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
1.
The death penalty has been used in the United States since colonial times
2.
In recent years many critics have attacked the death penalty as
ineffective, unevenly used, and unconstitutional
3.
In 1972, in Furman v. Georgia, the U.S. Supreme Court outlawed the
death penalty for two reasons
a.
It was unevenly applied to many crimes
b.
There were a lack of safeguards in place in many states
4.
From 1965 until 1977, there were no executions in the United States
5.
Many states then rewrote their death penalty statutes to meet the
procedural objections made by the U.S. Supreme Court in Furman v.
Georgia
6.
Thus, in 1976, in Gregg v. Georgia, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that if
proper guidelines and procedures were followed, the death penalty did not
violate the eighth Amendment ban against cruel and unusual punishment
92
Texas Government 2306-Unit 8 lecture notes
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Supreme Court guidelines include the following:
a.
No mandatory death penalty laws are permissible
b.
A capital crime must involve the taking of a human life
c.
Consideration must be given to the defendant's character and
record
d.
Consideration must be given to relevant mitigating circumstances
e.
Jurors opposed to the death penalty cannot automatically be
excluded from the jury in a capital felony case
Since the Gregg decision, all but twelve states have reinstated the
death penalty
Texas is the leading state in both sentencing people to death and in the
number of prisoners executed
a.
Since the death penalty was reinstated in Texas in 1976, Texas has
executed 106 of the 335 prisoners executed nationwide (from 1976
to July of 1996)
b.
Thus, Texas, with 7 percent of the U.S. population, has had about
one-third of the executions
c.
As of July 1996, there were 394 prisoners on death row awaiting
execution in Texas (only Florida and California have more)
d.
At the rate of one execution a week, it would take 6.7 years to
execute all of those prisoners
e.
In 1995, Texas executed 19 of 51 people executed nationwide
f.
In Texas, a few counties account for most of the death sentences-25 of the 254 counties in the state have supplied all 106 prisoners
executed in Texas since 1976, most of them in East Texas
g.
The Texas public heavily favors the death penalty, by a three-toone margin
h.
Endless delays and appeals and the long span between the
sentence and the execution reduce the effectiveness of the death
penalty--the average time from sentence to execution in Texas is
9.1 years
i.
Also, the cost to taxpayers for executing felons is quite high
Most executions (83 percent; 279 of 335) have been in southern states, a
reflection of the dominant traditionalistic culture of the South
In Texas and most other southern states, juries can determine the
sentence for all crimes, and juries seem more likely than judges to use the
death penalty
Some states sentence many prisoners to death but carry out few
executions (California., Pennsylvania, and Illinois are three such states)
Supporters of the death penalty have a number of convincing
arguments to defend capital punishment
a.
The death penalty is a deterrent because it makes persons think
twice about killing their victim if they know they can lose their life
93
Texas Government 2306-Unit 8 lecture notes
b.
14.
D.
The death penalty protects society from dangerous, violent
criminals who otherwise may be paroled one day and out walking
the streets, killing others
c.
Many violent criminals cannot be rehabilitated
d.
Capital punishment is proportionate to the crime--a life for a life
e.
It is not a violation of the eighth Amendment's ban against cruel and
unusual punishment because the framers of the Bill of Rights wrote
about prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment in the eighth
Amendment and not depriving any person of "life, liberty, or
property, without due process of law" in the fifth Amendment
Critics of the death penalty also have a number of persuasive
arguments
a.
Capital punishment is not a deterrent--just look at Texas; if it was a
deterrent, Texas should have one of the lowest homicide rates,
which it does not
b.
Most murders are crimes of passion when the murderer is not
thinking clearly--thus, the possibility of losing their life will not even
be thought of until after the crime is committed
c.
By twentieth century standards, the death penalty is cruel and
unusual punishment, in violation of the eight Amendment
d.
The death penalty is applied inequitably, with the poor and racial
minorities disproportionately sentenced to death row
e.
The possibility of error would make it difficult to correct a wrongful
verdict of guilty if the prisoner is executed
f.
Even murderers can be rehabilitated
g.
The wealthy can always hire better lawyers and avoid the death
sentence
POSSIBLE REFORMS
1.
Reformers call for a number of changes in incarceration policy to reduce
crime rates in Texas
a.
More meaningful interventions in the juvenile justice system, such
as accountable community-based programs or residential
institutional interventions are suggested
b.
Dr. Tony Fabelo, executive director of the Texas Criminal Justice
Policy Council points out that funding more adult prison and jail
space results in proportionately fewer dollars available for juvenile
justice initiatives
c.
Fabelo also argues that most offenders are incarcerated after their
criminal career has peaked, limiting the impact of more
incarceration on the crime rate
d.
Fabelo asserts that more punishment for adults may do very little to
continue lowering the Texas' crime rate, and may actually divert
94
Texas Government 2306-Unit 8 lecture notes
2.
funds that could more effectively impact a decrease in the crime
rate, if spent on juvenile justice policies
e.
The long-term cost of having the highest prison population and the
highest execution rate in the world should be weighed against the
cost of alternative programs that reformers argue might more
effectively reduce crime
Possible reforms in the use of the death penalty should also be
considered
a.
Shortening the appeals process to speed up executions might
make the death penalty more effective if it more closely follows the
crime
b.
Critics propose eliminating the death penalty altogether because it
is not a deterrent--if it were, Texas should have one of the lowest
homicide rates in the United States, which it does not
c.
Eliminating the disparity in the use of the death penalty, in terms of
race and wealth, would make the death penalty more acceptable to
some of its critics
95