Scholarlink

<p>In one of the first empirical examinations of the submission and acceptance of the heinous, atrocious, and cruel (HAC) aggravator in actual capital sentencing trials, we explore legal and extra-legal predictors of its submission by prosecutors and acceptance juries. Given that HAC involves a relatively subjective assessment by both parties, we do so with a focal concerns perspective that recognizes the role certain dynamics may play when decision making involves vague and/or unfamiliar concepts. Utilizing a near population of murder trials in North Carolina from 1977 through 2024 where the death penalty was sought, we find that both prosecutors’ decisions to submit a HAC aggravator and juries’ decisions to accept it if HAC is submitted are guided bylargely legalistic focal concerns involving blameworthiness and community threat. However, we also find some arbitrariness in those decisions via the influence of extra-legal factors, indicating that perceptual cues may also play a role. Implications of those findings are discussed and possible remedies to address the arbitrariness associated with this aggravating circumstance are considered.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

An Empirical Analysis of the Heinous, Atrocious, and Cruel (HAC) Aggravating Circumstance: A Focal Concerns Approach

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月10日

查看全文
  • Beth Bjerregaard,
  • Courtney Weber,
  • M. Dwayne Smith,
  • John K. Cochran,
  • Sondra J. Fogel

摘要

In one of the first empirical examinations of the submission and acceptance of the heinous, atrocious, and cruel (HAC) aggravator in actual capital sentencing trials, we explore legal and extra-legal predictors of its submission by prosecutors and acceptance juries. Given that HAC involves a relatively subjective assessment by both parties, we do so with a focal concerns perspective that recognizes the role certain dynamics may play when decision making involves vague and/or unfamiliar concepts. Utilizing a near population of murder trials in North Carolina from 1977 through 2024 where the death penalty was sought, we find that both prosecutors’ decisions to submit a HAC aggravator and juries’ decisions to accept it if HAC is submitted are guided bylargely legalistic focal concerns involving blameworthiness and community threat. However, we also find some arbitrariness in those decisions via the influence of extra-legal factors, indicating that perceptual cues may also play a role. Implications of those findings are discussed and possible remedies to address the arbitrariness associated with this aggravating circumstance are considered.