456:
these decisions, even in the absence of a direct connection between the illness and the illegal action (as is required in the guilt phase of the insanity defense), the court acknowledges that the effects of a severe mental illness have pervasive effect on a person's behavior and can therefore be a relevant consideration in death penalty considerations. If all relevant mitigating factors are not considered in a death penalty case, the punishment can be considered "cruel and unusual", the
Supreme Court ruled in
308:
245:
181:
36:
592:
361:, and if they do, the powers of the court to impose the maximum punishment are taken away and the sentence to be pronounced is reduced in accordance with the scale laid down in art. 463 of the Code penal. The most important result of this rule in earlier times was to enable a jury to prevent the infliction of
452:, saying that the jury be instructed to consider mitigating factors when answering unrelated questions. The Supreme Court's rulings have broadened the definition of mitigating evidence in the United States and systematically removed the procedural barriers to jury consideration and weight of that evidence.
472:
that a defendant facing the death penalty is entitled to present any aspect of character or record, and any circumstance of the offense that might serve as a basis for a sentence less than death. The court may limit evidence not pertaining to these issues as "irrelevant". Although it has been argued
455:
The effect of these decisions is to broaden the definition of mitigating factors related to mental illness within the U.S. justice system, and to be more consistent with standard psychiatric and psychological findings that correlate specific behaviors to identifiable mental disorders. As a result of
282:
According to the Indian procedure the provision of
Section 235(2) of Criminal Procedure Code calls upon the Court that the convicted accused must be given an opportunity of being heard on the question of sentence. This provides the accused an opportunity to place his antecedents, social and economic
286:
Besides the statutory provisions, the
Constitution of India also empowers the President and the Governor of the State to grant pardon to the condemned offenders in appropriate cases. These powers are, however, co-extensive with the legislative powers. The power to cut short a sentence by an act of
287:
executive in India and elsewhere. The controversy raised in this regard in
Nanavati's case has been settled by the Supreme Court once for all in the case of SARAT CHANDRA V/S. KHAGENDRA NATH which affirmed the principle that sentencing power of judiciary and executive are readily distinguishable.
391:
There is empirical evidence that expert testimony on future dangerousness has less effect on jury decisions than does expert testimony on the defendant's mental functioning. However, there is no evidence so far that expert testimony does influence the jury on sentencing outcomes in death penalty
161:
rather than a mitigating factor, as an act done in justified self-defense is not deemed to be a crime. If the offender was provoked but cannot be considered to have acted in self-defense, then the provocation can be used as a mitigating factor but not as a legal defense.
460:, a case in which the prosecution sought to exclude evidence of a low IQ in the penalty phase of the trial. There is also an ongoing tendency of the Supreme Court to seek to include evidence of a defendant's potential for rehabilitation and a law-abiding future.
373:
In the U.S., most mitigating factors are presented in ways that are best described by clinical evaluations of the defendant and the circumstances, thus involving psychological or psychiatric analysis in the presentation to the court. Approximately one half of
416:
must be given the opportunity to consider all mitigating evidence before determining the sentence. Thus the Court has stressed that because of the constitutional requirement of the fundamental respect for human dignity set out by the
218:
According to historical
English and Welsh procedure, the jury has no power to determine the punishment to be awarded for an offense. The sentence, with certain exceptions in capital cases, is within the sole discretion of the
392:
cases. Mitigation efforts are also often met with cynicism where the presentation of trauma and abuse in the context of a death penalty case can be viewed as nothing more than "the abuse excuse", a phrased coined by
327:
It should be brought up to date to reflect subsequent history or scholarship (including the references, if any). When you have completed the review, replace this notice with a simple note on this article's talk
264:
It should be brought up to date to reflect subsequent history or scholarship (including the references, if any). When you have completed the review, replace this notice with a simple note on this article's talk
200:
It should be brought up to date to reflect subsequent history or scholarship (including the references, if any). When you have completed the review, replace this notice with a simple note on this article's talk
763:
733:
793:
662:
764:"Death Penalty Mitigation - A State Court Cannot Bar the Consideration of Mitigating Evidence if the Sentencer Could Reasonably Find That Such Evidence Warrants a Sentence Less Than Death"
351:, art. 345), it is the sole right and the duty of a jury in a criminal case to pronounce whether or not the perpetration of the offense was attended by extenuating circumstances (
473:
that the defendant should be able to offer evidence questioning the morality of the death penalty or descriptions of the execution process, no court has allowed such testimony.
435:
418:
607:
294:, the judge is entitled to take into account matters proved during the trial, or laid before him/her after verdict, as a guide to determining the quantum of punishment.
46:
794:"Death Penalty Mitigation - Future Likelihood of Making a Positive Contribution to Society (Rehabilitation) Considered Mitigating Evidence in Capital Sentencing"
231:, a rider recommending the accused to mercy on the ground of grave provocation received, or other circumstances which in their view should mitigate the penalty.
612:
500:
318:
255:
191:
425:, information must be provided on the character and previous history of the defendant, as well as the circumstances surrounding the particular offense.
109:
presented to the court regarding the defendant or the circumstances of the crime that might result in reduced charges or a lesser sentence. Unlike a
494:
405:
382:
as a mitigating factor, if it is accompanied by an evaluation that the defendant's ability to appreciate the criminal aspect of his offense (
223:, subject to the statutory prescriptions as to the kind and maximum of punishment. It is common practice for juries to add to their verdict,
409:
573:
831:
645:
558:
113:, the presentation of mitigating factors will not result in the acquittal of a defendant. The opposite of a mitigating factor is an
80:
699:
734:"Mitigating Factors in the Death Penalty Jury Instructions Must Directly Address Mitigating Factors in Death Penalty Cases"
357:). They are not bound to say anything about the matter, but the whole or the majority may qualify the verdict by finding
422:
412:
has attempted to make the sentence of death in the United States less arbitrary by emphasizing that the judge or
506:
62:
58:
907:
700:"The Importance Of Recognising Trauma Throughout Capital Mitigation Investigations And Presentations"
142:
362:
126:
637:
633:
Psychological
Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers
631:
891:
827:
674:
641:
554:
523:
448:
in death penalty cases did not ask the jury to consider as mitigating factors the defendant's
445:
379:
114:
388:), or his ability to control his behavior to meet the requirements of the law, was impaired.
597:
One or more of the preceding sentences incorporates text from a publication now in the
517:
430:
663:"Commentary: Expert Testimony as a Potential Asset in Defense of Capital Sentencing Cases"
485: – Formal statement by a defendant who has been found guilty prior to being sentenced
440:
393:
158:
110:
358:
17:
106:
901:
603:
598:
449:
154:
94:
224:
488:
482:
375:
228:
678:
404:
In the United States, the issue of mitigating factors is most important in
852:
283:
background and mitigating and extenuating circumstances before the court.
869:
673:(4). Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law: 519–522.
384:
129:
of
England and Wales lists the following as possible mitigating factors:
378:
allow evidence that the defendant was under extreme mental or emotional
804:(3). Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law: 391–393
744:(1). Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law: 110–111
616:. Vol. 10 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 86.
503: – Rules for sentencing convicts in the U.S. federal courts system
774:(2). Journal of American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law: 265–267
220:
798:
Journal of the
American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online
768:
Journal of the
American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online
738:
Journal of the
American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online
667:
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online
413:
291:
134:
301:
238:
174:
29:
874:
The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
857:
The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
894:
from the Federal Defender Services Office Training Division.
826:. Westbury, N.Y.: The Foundation Press. pp. 725–726.
317:
is largely based on an article in the out-of-copyright
254:
is largely based on an article in the out-of-copyright
190:
is largely based on an article in the out-of-copyright
636:(2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press. pp.
54:
520: – Condition caused by long-term substance abuse
530:
Pages displaying wikidata descriptions as a fallback
513:
Pages displaying wikidata descriptions as a fallback
851:Spain, Sarah; Schmedlen, George W. (January 2006).
792:Beszterczey, Sara; Grudzinskas, Albert J. (2007).
290:Quite independently of any recommendation by the
553:. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 3.
408:cases. In a series of decisions since 1972, the
732:Fluent, Thomas; Guyer, Melvin (January 2006).
661:Edersheim, Judith G.; Beck, James C. (2005).
43:The examples and perspective in this article
8:
625:
623:
352:
346:
762:Spain, Sarah; Schmedlen, George W. (2005).
501:United States Federal Sentencing Guidelines
27:In criminal law, extenuating circumstances
870:"Mitigating Factors in the Death Penalty"
133:Admitting the offense, such as through a
81:Learn how and when to remove this message
585:
583:
581:
528: – United States Supreme Court case
511: – United States Supreme Court case
727:
725:
541:
495:Capital punishment in the United States
7:
25:
868:Romeo, Alicia A. (January 2006).
590:
497: – Death penalty in the USA
306:
243:
179:
34:
444:, remanded cases in which the
436:Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals
1:
348:Code d'instruction criminelle
324:, which was produced in 1911.
261:, which was produced in 1911.
197:, which was produced in 1911.
365:for murder (now abolished).
822:Bonnie, Richard J. (1997).
491: – Catholic Church law
410:United States Supreme Court
57:, discuss the issue on the
924:
853:"Death Penalty Mitigation"
698:Wayland, Kathleen (2008).
549:Tonry, Michael H. (1997).
468:The Supreme Court held in
423:United States Constitution
608:Extenuating Circumstances
354:circonstances atténuantes
508:Strickland v. Washington
105:, is any information or
103:extenuating circumstance
18:Mitigating circumstances
613:Encyclopædia Britannica
434:, and subsequently the
320:Encyclopædia Britannica
257:Encyclopædia Britannica
193:Encyclopædia Britannica
353:
347:
630:Melton, Gary (1997).
428:The Supreme Court in
892:Mitigation resources
63:create a new article
55:improve this article
45:may not represent a
101:, also known as an
704:Hofstra Law Review
574:Sentencing Council
551:Sentencing matters
363:capital punishment
345:Under French law (
127:Sentencing Council
115:aggravating factor
525:Tennard v. Dretke
458:Tennard v. Dretke
446:jury instructions
343:
342:
280:
279:
216:
215:
171:England and Wales
99:mitigating factor
91:
90:
83:
65:, as appropriate.
16:(Redirected from
915:
881:
864:
838:
837:
819:
813:
812:
810:
809:
789:
783:
782:
780:
779:
759:
753:
752:
750:
749:
729:
720:
719:
717:
715:
695:
689:
688:
686:
685:
658:
652:
651:
627:
618:
617:
596:
594:
593:
587:
576:
571:
565:
564:
546:
531:
518:Settled insanity
514:
431:Penry v. Lynaugh
419:Eighth Amendment
356:
350:
338:
335:
329:
322:Eleventh Edition
310:
309:
302:
275:
272:
266:
259:Eleventh Edition
247:
246:
239:
211:
208:
202:
195:Eleventh Edition
183:
182:
175:
86:
79:
75:
72:
66:
38:
37:
30:
21:
923:
922:
918:
917:
916:
914:
913:
912:
898:
897:
888:
867:
850:
847:
845:Further reading
842:
841:
834:
821:
820:
816:
807:
805:
791:
790:
786:
777:
775:
761:
760:
756:
747:
745:
731:
730:
723:
713:
711:
697:
696:
692:
683:
681:
660:
659:
655:
648:
629:
628:
621:
606:, ed. (1911). "
602:
591:
589:
588:
579:
572:
568:
561:
548:
547:
543:
538:
529:
512:
479:
470:Lockett v. Ohio
466:
441:Bigby v. Dretke
402:
394:Alan Dershowitz
371:
339:
333:
330:
326:
311:
307:
300:
276:
270:
267:
263:
248:
244:
237:
212:
206:
203:
199:
184:
180:
173:
168:
166:By legal system
150:Showing remorse
123:
87:
76:
70:
67:
52:
39:
35:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
921:
919:
911:
910:
900:
899:
896:
895:
887:
886:External links
884:
883:
882:
865:
846:
843:
840:
839:
832:
814:
784:
754:
721:
690:
653:
646:
619:
604:Chisholm, Hugh
577:
566:
559:
540:
539:
537:
534:
533:
532:
521:
515:
504:
498:
492:
486:
478:
475:
465:
462:
401:
398:
370:
367:
341:
340:
314:
312:
305:
299:
296:
278:
277:
251:
249:
242:
236:
233:
214:
213:
187:
185:
178:
172:
169:
167:
164:
152:
151:
148:
145:
140:
139:Mental illness
137:
122:
119:
89:
88:
49:of the subject
47:worldwide view
42:
40:
33:
26:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
920:
909:
906:
905:
903:
893:
890:
889:
885:
880:(1): 118–120.
879:
875:
871:
866:
863:(1): 118–120.
862:
858:
854:
849:
848:
844:
835:
833:1-56662-448-7
829:
825:
818:
815:
803:
799:
795:
788:
785:
773:
769:
765:
758:
755:
743:
739:
735:
728:
726:
722:
709:
705:
701:
694:
691:
680:
676:
672:
668:
664:
657:
654:
649:
647:1-57230-236-4
643:
639:
635:
634:
626:
624:
620:
615:
614:
609:
605:
600:
599:public domain
586:
584:
582:
578:
575:
570:
567:
562:
560:9780195094985
556:
552:
545:
542:
535:
527:
526:
522:
519:
516:
510:
509:
505:
502:
499:
496:
493:
490:
487:
484:
481:
480:
476:
474:
471:
463:
461:
459:
453:
451:
450:mental health
447:
443:
442:
437:
433:
432:
426:
424:
420:
415:
411:
407:
406:death penalty
400:Death penalty
399:
397:
395:
389:
387:
386:
381:
377:
369:United States
368:
366:
364:
360:
355:
349:
337:
325:
323:
321:
315:This section
313:
304:
303:
297:
295:
293:
288:
284:
274:
262:
260:
258:
252:This section
250:
241:
240:
234:
232:
230:
226:
222:
210:
198:
196:
194:
188:This section
186:
177:
176:
170:
165:
163:
160:
159:legal defense
156:
149:
146:
144:
141:
138:
136:
132:
131:
130:
128:
120:
118:
116:
112:
111:legal defense
108:
104:
100:
96:
85:
82:
74:
71:December 2010
64:
60:
56:
50:
48:
41:
32:
31:
19:
908:Criminal law
877:
873:
860:
856:
824:Criminal Law
823:
817:
806:. Retrieved
801:
797:
787:
776:. Retrieved
771:
767:
757:
746:. Retrieved
741:
737:
712:. Retrieved
707:
703:
693:
682:. Retrieved
670:
666:
656:
632:
611:
569:
550:
544:
524:
507:
469:
467:
457:
454:
439:
429:
427:
403:
390:
383:
372:
344:
334:January 2020
331:
319:
316:
289:
285:
281:
271:January 2024
268:
256:
253:
217:
207:January 2020
204:
192:
189:
155:Self-defense
153:
124:
102:
98:
95:criminal law
92:
77:
68:
44:
376:U.S. states
359:extenuation
143:Provocation
135:guilty plea
808:2007-10-20
778:2007-10-20
748:2007-10-12
684:2007-10-17
489:Canon 1324
483:Allocution
229:not guilty
536:Footnotes
147:Young age
59:talk page
902:Category
714:24 March
679:16394229
477:See also
385:mens rea
380:distress
121:Examples
107:evidence
53:You may
638:265–266
601::
421:to the
830:
677:
644:
595:
557:
464:Limits
298:France
225:guilty
710:: 923
328:page.
265:page.
235:India
221:judge
201:page.
157:is a
61:, or
828:ISBN
716:2021
675:PMID
642:ISBN
555:ISBN
414:jury
292:jury
125:The
97:, a
610:".
438:in
227:or
93:In
904::
878:34
876:.
872:.
861:34
859:.
855:.
802:35
800:.
796:.
772:33
770:.
766:.
742:34
740:.
736:.
724:^
708:36
706:.
702:.
671:33
669:.
665:.
640:.
622:^
580:^
396:.
117:.
836:.
811:.
781:.
751:.
718:.
687:.
650:.
563:.
336:)
332:(
273:)
269:(
209:)
205:(
84:)
78:(
73:)
69:(
51:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.