Mental disorder and criminal law : responsibility, punishment, and competence /

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Imprint:New York : Springer, c2009.
Description:1 online resource (vii, 248 p.)
Language:English
Subject:
Format: E-Resource Book
URL for this record:http://pi.lib.uchicago.edu/1001/cat/bib/8888087
Hidden Bibliographic Details
Other authors / contributors:Schopp, Robert F.
ISBN:9780387848440 (alk. paper)
0387848444 (alk. paper)
9780387848457 (e-ISBN)
0387848452 (e-ISBN)
6611810560 (electronic bk.)
9786611810566 (electronic bk.)
Notes:Includes bibliographical references and index.
Description based on print version record.
Summary:The death penalty has long played a central role in jurisprudence, in terms of identifying the most serious offenses and the most culpable offenders, as well as understanding the mental conditions that may exclude an offender from such a sentence. This title explores the concept of 'protecting well-being while pursuing justice'.
Other form:Print version: Mental disorder and criminal law. New York : Springer, c2009 9780387848440 0387848444
Description
Summary:Robert F. Schopp Recent Supreme Court decisions categorically preclude the application of capital punishment to convicted offenders who were below the age of eighteen or mentally 1 retarded at the time they committed the crimes for which they were sentenced. Neither opinion suggests that offenders in these categories cannot be criminally responsible for their offenses, and the Atkins opinion explicitly recognizes that some mentally 2 retarded offenders can qualify as criminally responsible for their offenses. In each case, part of the reasoning in support of the exemption from capital sentences purports to show that capital punishment of these offenders would serve neither the retributive 3 nor the deterrent functions of criminal punishment. Both opinions focus substantial attention on the retributive rationale, contending that these offenders lack sufficient 4 culpability, blameworthiness, or depravity to merit capital punishment. The opinions recognize that a categorical bar for all offenders below a specified age or level of intelligence might exempt some individuals who do not lack culpability sufficient to justify capital sentences. The opinions draw categorical rules, however, to avoid the risk that some individuals who lack sufficient culpability to deserve capital punish- 5 ment will be misidentified as sufficiently culpable to merit capital sentences. The dissenting opinions in each case recognize that offenders in these categories have limitations that render them less culpable on average than unimpaired offenders who commit similar crimes.
Physical Description:1 online resource (vii, 248 p.)
Bibliography:Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN:9780387848440
0387848444
9780387848457
0387848452
6611810560
9786611810566