McClesky v. Kemp (1987)

[lazychick17]

McCleskey, a black man, was convicted of murdering a police officer in Georgia and sentenced to death. In a writ of habeas corpus, McCleskey argued that a statistical study proved that the imposition of the death penalty in Georgia depended to some extent on the race of the victim and the accused. The study found that black defendants who kill white victims are the most likely to receive death sentences in the state.



1.Can a statistical study that shows a general trend be used to determine whether a procedure used by a state (in this case the Georgia sentencing process) violates the constitution?

2.What are the advantages and disadvantages of using studies such as the one described in this case? Could a decision in favor of McCleskey open the door for other kinds of procedural questions? For example, are black people more likely to be given speeding tickets?

[Ethel]

This is your homework, not mine.

Read the recommended texts