We could easily spend months discussing the history and modern specifics of the death penalty in specific jurisdictions like Ohio or the US. I will sometime reference this history and modern practices in class over the next few weeks, but here are some links of note concerning both jurisdictions to provide everyone with a (low-stress, high-learning) chance to discover a lot more on these topics:
Links with background on Ohio's history and practices in the administration of the death penalty
- From the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections
- From the Ohio section of website of Death Penalty Information Center
- American Bar Association Ohio Death Penalty Assessment
- Ohio Attorney General's 2012 Capital Crimes Annual Report
- Ohio Revised Code Section 2929.04: Death penalty or imprisonment – aggravating and mitigating factors
Links with background on US history and practices in the administration of the death penalty
- Justice Department 2000 Survey/Review of Federal Death Penalty
- From the federal section of website of Death Penalty Information Center
- Congressional Research Service 2005 Overiew Report on Federal Death Penalty
- Title 18 United States Code Section 3592: Mitigating and Aggravating Factors to be Considered in Determining whether a Sentence of Death is Justified
Sentencing Class @ OSU Moritz College of Law 
2 responses to “Some background and basics on capital punishment history and practices in Ohio and US”
This has nothing to do with the death penalty but I know that this is in line with your other legal interests, Professor Berman. Although I haven’t had a chance to listen to the podcast yet, last Thursday Ann Fisher [NPR-WOSU] talked about how drug education in schools is changing in light of marijuana legalization.
If you’re interested, here’s the link: http://wosu.org/2012/allsides/drug-education-in-schools/
LikeLike
Regarding the “modern specifics” of the death penalty’s administration, using expert testimony to assess the defendant’s mental capacity to stand trial, be executed, etc., strikes me as more or less futile. The prosecution can almost always find an expert willing to testify for competence, and inevitably the defense will have an expert willing to claim incompetence. Obviously, prosecutors and defense attorneys must both vigorously pursue their respective cases, but expert testimony on mental capacity often seems like a costly way to get nowhere.
LikeLike