Statute of limitations and the death penalty

Statute of Limitations

Whether or not appeals of death row inmates should be resolved more quickly than they are at the present

The current justice system takes 7-12 years of time to decide on whether or not to lift a death row sentence to an inmate. This slow movement of bringing justice decisions can be considered inhumane to death row inmates and must be given with proper attention by the justice system by quickly resolving death row appeals. 7-12 years of waiting for a decision for a death row appeal would be a torment to an inmate and to his family. For inmates waiting for a decision, this length of time is almost similar to serving a sentence that may not be what is due to them. Moreover, considering that there is a possibility that not all those who were sentenced to a death row are guilty, the slow process of completing an appeal is apparently more inhumane to innocent death row inmates.

The slow process of deciding on a death row appeal causes disadvantages to death row inmates. An example of which is the case of Scott Peterson that was sentenced to death due to old age of his appeal. Old age of appeals, according to California's Chief Justice Ronald George, is the leading cause of death recommendations for death row inmates (Cooper, 2004). This is unjust because it seems that the delivery of justice is not done well and that the slow process of justice forces the recommendation of death just to close cases of appeal.

Quickening the resolution of death row appeals must be implemented because its slow process does not only aggravate the defendants but the state as well. Paying for state-lawyers, appointed by the court, for a long time of service for just one case of appeal is costly. Moreover, the condition of retaining inmates in prison, who may be innocent and deserve to be freed, or who may really deserve death judgment, is costly.

What to do about the prevalence of plea bargaining.

Plea bargaining should be limited depending on the level of crime that an individual has committed. This is to avoid the ineffective delivery of justice to crime offenders and to the crime victims.

One disadvantage of plea bargaining, according to an online article is The concrete disadvantage is that there is some reduction in the conviction offense or sentence on both.

Plea bargaining also has advantages but only when it is applied on appropriate criminal cases. Therefore, in my stand, plea bargaining should not be totally abolished. Rather, it must be implemented on moderate cases of offense. The strategy is to set a law that will put limitations on plea bargaining. According to an online article,