Georgia cannot ensure fairness, accuracy in death penalty cases, state legal team says in ABA project

A team of experts from Georgia's legal community has concluded that Georgia cannot ensure fairness and accuracy in every capital case. Areas the team identified as in great need of reform include inadequate funding for defense counsel, failure to provide defense counsel in state habeas proceedings, lack of meaningful review of proportionality of sentences, inadequate pattern jury instructions addressing mitigation, continued existence of racial disparities in capital sentencing, and the unreasonably strict "beyond a reasonable doubt" burden of proof required to prove mental retardation.

The Georgia team is urging the state to sponsor a comprehensive study to determine whether its death penalty system has unacceptable disparities related to race, geography or other factors; to establish a statewide clearinghouse to review all decisions to seek the death penalty for proportionality and disparities; and to restrict death sentences to cases where the defendant is found guilty of intentional murder or murder committed with a reckless disregard for human life. In the meantime, a majority of the team is urging the state to impose a moratorium on both executions and death penalty prosecutions.

"Our criminal justice system can never be fail-safe, but it can and must be better at protecting our fundamental commitment to fairness and accuracy in capital sentencing. This research indicates that we are far from meeting this commitment," said Anne S. Emanuel, associate dean for academic affairs at Georgia State University College of Law, chair of the Georgia team.

The study was sponsored by the ABA, and conducted under the Death Penalty Moratorium Implementation Project of the ABA Section of Individual Rights and Responsibilities. Georgia is the first of 16 states being assessed under the ABA Project. Other assessments are being conducted in Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia. The assessment states were selected for a variety of reasons, including regional, racial, and socio-economic diversity, the size of the state's death row, and the number of previously identified problems in death penalty administration.

The full report and executive summary, including charts that identify specific recommendations and state compliance levels, are available in an online media kit on the ABA's Web site. Additional information about the Death Penalty Moratorium Implementation Project and the assessment project also is posted there, as will be reports from additional states as they become available.

Although the ABA has no policy either in support of or against the death penalty, in 1997 it called on death penalty jurisdictions to cease executions until they conduct detailed studies of whether their capital punishment systems are fair, provide due process and are free of discrimination, and make necessary reforms.

Back to top

© 2006 American Bar Association