Zuniga 1

Jonah Zuniga

Instructor McCann

English 1302.203

7 March 2022

Annotated Bibliography

Cattani, Kent E., and Paul J. McMurdie. “Death Penalty 101: The Death Penalty Charging

Decision in Arizona. Is There a Better Way?” Arizona State Law Journal, vol. 53, no. 3, Fall

2021, pp. 793–803. EBSCOhost,

https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lgh&AN=155174311&scope=site.

For this article, the author is for the use of the death penalty because of the fact that this

article is talking about whether Arizona’s death penalty should be state level or local level. Two

former prosecutors who are now judges on the Arizona Court of Appeals propose reforming

Arizona's death penalty process so that the choice to charge someone with capital punishment is

decided at the state level rather than at the county level. Murder is one of the "most deserving of

the death penalty." Furthermore, it would make it easier to limit the types of cases in which the

death penalty is sought to those in which such a sentence is more likely to be imposed at trial and

upheld on appeal. the death penalty process in Arizona overburdens the criminal justice system

and is inconsistently applied throughout the state. In the end, the death penalty in Arizona has

been used inconsistently through out the state and making a reform allows for it to be consistent.
 Zuniga 2

Mangum, Maruice. “Testing the Influence of Social Capital on Support for the Death Penalty.”

Social Justice Research, vol. 32, no. 4, Dec. 2019, pp. 431–44. EBSCOhost,

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-019-00341-9.

This article talks about the support of the death penalty, a capital punishment, and that

there is factors to this. A variety of causes have contributed to the disparity in public opinion in

the United States over the usage of the death sentence. While a lot of studies have looked into

public opinion on the death penalty, none have looked at the function of social capital in

determining whether people support or oppose the death sentence. It is stated in this paper that

social capital explains why some Americans oppose the death sentence while others do not.

While ths article talks about what some Americans talk about supporting or not supporting the

author does not really make a clear statement on whether or not they oppose the death penalty. In

the end, persons with higher social capital are less likely to favor government action to kill

convicted criminals. This hypothesis has been proven correct. The results of the logistic

regression analyses, which used data from the 2008 American National Election Study, reveal

that social capital is inversely associated to support for the death sentence.

Thompson, Rebecca R., et al. “National Opinions on Death Penalty Punishment for the Boston

Marathon Bomber before versus after Sentencing.” Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, vol. 26,

no. 4, Nov. 2020, pp. 455–62. EBSCOhost, https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000244.

To start off, Humans want their internal thoughts and the outside world to be in sync.

People are more likely to accept and respect choices made by legal authorities in order to stay in

line with the society in which they live. Few studies have looked at these biases in a practical

setting. In a natural quasi-experiment, we looked at the relationship between Dzhokhar

 Zuniga 3

Tsarnaev's (the Boston Marathon bomber) sentencing and Americans' opinions on his

punishment. In line with the legitimization literature, we expected Tsarnaev's sentencing would

be associated with increasing support for his death penalty sentence. In this article, the author

also does not have a direct claim on whether or not they oppose the death penalty and rather they

talk about why people support the death penalty. They use a lot of back up information and

numbers and statistics on whether or not people support the death penalty.

GROSS, SAMUEL R. “The Death Penalty, Public Opinion, and Politics in the United States.” St.

Louis University Law Journal, vol. 62, no. 4, Summer 2018, pp. 763–79. EBSCOhost,

https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lgh&AN=136685001&scope=site.

This article and its author talk about the time the author was in law school and whether or

not they do support the death penalty. This author showed more confusion than the other articles

and did not know whether to support California’s death penalty. When first asked about the death

penalty the author did not even know if California had any death penalty. The author believes

that capital punishment is a bad concept. In modern nations, it is a policy that has no positive

value at all. It does not, in particular, prevent murder or crime in general. It's also prohibitively

pricey. It costs a lot of money and causes a lot of misery for a lot of people, including the

survivors of capital crimes and the families of those who are slain. In the end, the author does not

support the death penalty and thinks that there is no use, and has reasons for it.
 Zuniga 4

Mamczarz, Katarzyna. “The Death Penalty in Japan.” Japan Mission Journal, vol. 72, no. 4,

Winter 2018, pp. 234–40. EBSCOhost,

https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=asn&AN=133747478&scope=site.

Katarzyna Mamczarz is a PhD student at Waseda University's Graduate School of

Asia-Pacific Studies in Tokyo. Her dissertation examines the issue of capital punishment in

Japan. “‘Waiting for death is a kind of torture. Worse than death itself.” In this article the author

is against the death penalty and with that she provides reasons as to why the death penalty is

wrong even if it is in Japan. Japan, on the other hand, has a surprising amount. In 2017, four

people were executed and three were condemned to death, leaving a total of 134 people facing

the ultimate penalty. Three people were executed and three more were sentenced to death the

previous year. Thirteen people were killed in July 2018, the most since Japan executed more than

ten people in 2008. Japan's death punishment is startling and terrible, and there is no reason for it

to continue.

Lee, Jason, and Ryan Hall. “The Death Penalty and Mental Illness: An Evolving Standard?”

Psychiatric Times, vol. 34, no. 6, June 2017, pp. 1–4. EBSCOhost,

https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=123799948&scope=site.

In this article, it also talks about people's opinions and not necessarily the author. But the

author at some point does include a part of his opinion. Although the majority of states still allow

capital punishment, this may not reflect the genuine national mood: many of these states haven't

carried out an execution in over a decade.Although the death penalty was considered an

appropriate form of punishment at the time the United States Constitution was written, it did not
 Zuniga 5

take long for states to restrict or outright prohibit it. Michigan was the first state to do so in 1846.

Capital punishment is still legal in 31 states today. Although this statistic may represent the

majority of states, it may not accurately reflect the genuine national sentiment on death

punishment because several of these states haven't performed an execution in over a decade.

In the end, the author does not really support the death penalty and is fully against it.

Gerwig-Moore, Sarah. “Death Penalty.” Mercer Law Review, vol. 70, no. 1, Fall 2018, pp.

73–80. EBSCOhost,

https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=134567440&scope=site.

With a sample size of only a few judgments deciding substantive problems, it's difficult

to draw any conclusions or trends from Georgia's capital jurisprudence right now. What is clear,

however, is that the appellate review of such cases is dwindling, thanks to interim appeals

decided in cases awaiting both capital trials and appellate challenges. It's unclear if this tendency

will continue, but for the time being, the special obstacles and considerations that capital cases

require remain unusual at best. That court—which has exclusive jurisdiction over all

intermediate appeals in capital cases2, all direct appeals in murder cases (whether or not a capital

sentence was imposed),3, and all appeals from habeas corpus cases 4—used to be more busier

with death penalty cases. This is becoming less and less true. This is due to a number of factors.

In the end, the author does not have a clear view.

Hulpke, John F. “If All Else Fails, A Corporate Death Penalty?” Journal of Management Inquiry,

vol. 26, no. 4, Oct. 2017, pp. 433–39. EBSCOhost, https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492617706545.

 Zuniga 6

In this article, the author believes that corruption still exists. The wrongdoings continue.

If there have been any penalties, they have been minor. Corporations that consistently fail to

fulfill accepted ethical standards should be forced to close their doors. Companies who employ

corruption to attain their objectives, cause permanent environmental damage, cause physical

agony and death, or violate basic human rights should face the death penalty. Individuals are the

focus of the traditional death penalty. I raise the issue of the death penalty to the level of the

organization. He believes there are weapons that can be used to carry out a corporate death

penalty. Business practices that violate ethical standards are continuing. He then goes on to say if

Volkswagen, or any of the other companies included in this book, were put out of business, it

would send a message. He then states It's time to put your tools to work and move forward,

Mere, Winibaldus Stefanus. “Dignity, Biblical Justice, Forgiveness, and the Death Penalty.”

Japan Mission Journal, vol. 74, no. 4, Winter 2020, pp. 259–67. EBSCOhost,

https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=asn&AN=149003583&scope=site.

Winibaldus Stefanus Mere SVD holds a PhD in Law (International Human Rights Law)

from the University of London's SOAS Law School. He is currently an Associate Professor and

Senior Research Fellow at Nanzan University's Institute for Social Ethics. However, due to time

constraints, she did not go into greater detail about how forgiveness should be understood in the

context of criminal punishment, particularly in the case of the death penalty. This question will

be addressed by delving into the philosophical, moral, and theological understanding of capital

punishment in relation to the concepts of human dignity, justice, and forgiveness. I contend that

the principle of human dignity, which implies the moral imperative to do justice and forgive, will
 Zuniga 7

encourage a more humane form of punishment, if not a complete rejection of retributive

punishment, in the future. in the form of the death penalty This will then contribute to the

establishment of transformative justice, in which basic human rights are restored in our society.

Tóth, Zoltán J. “The Death Penalty in Hungary during the Enlightenment and the Reform Era.”

Journal on European History of Law, vol. 12, no. 1, Jan. 2021, pp. 121–29. EBSCOhost,

https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=asn&AN=150786227&scope=site.

The current paper examines the history of the death penalty in Hungary from the second

half of the 18th century to the middle of the 19th century. This is a critical period on the path to

the abolition of the death penalty in Hungary (as well as in the enlightened countries of Europe),

during which the death penalty would not be abolished, but its use would be limited to serious

crimes. However, it remains applicable for extraordinary crimes, primarily in martial law

regulations, and is even used extensively in these cases. This can be seen in Hungary, particularly

during the months of the 1848-1849 revolution and war for independence, as well as the years of

retaliation that followed. The autonomous Hungarian legislation and criminal law application

ceased to exist. As a result, the vast majority of death sentences were imposed during martial law

proceedings.
Zuniga 8