18 U.S.C. § 3593 — Special hearing to determine whether a sentence of death is justified
submitted 32 years ago by Pub. L. 103-322 to r/title-18-CRIMES-AND-CRIMINAL-PROCEDURE · 1,337 words · no verdicts yet
This section sets the notice, hearing, evidence, voting, and nondiscrimination rules for deciding whether a death sentence is justified.
(a) Notice by the Government. If the government attorney believes a death sentence may be justified for an offense covered by section 3591, the attorney must, a reasonable time before trial or acceptance of a guilty plea, file a signed notice with the court and serve it on the defendant. The notice must (1) say that the government believes a death sentence is justified if the defendant is convicted and will seek that sentence, and (2) list the aggravating factors the government plans to prove. The listed factors may concern the offense’s effects on the victim and family and may include oral testimony, a victim-impact statement identifying the victim and the extent and scope of the injury and loss, and other relevant information. The court may allow an amendment for good cause.
(b) Hearing Before a Court or Jury. If the notice was filed and the defendant is found guilty or pleads guilty to a section 3591 offense, the trial judge, plea judge, or another judge if necessary must hold a separate sentencing hearing. It must be before (1) the jury that decided guilt; (2) a new jury if (A) there was a guilty plea, (B) the trial was before a court without a jury, (C) the original jury was discharged for good cause, or (D) the sentence must be reconsidered; or (3) the court alone, if the defendant moves for that procedure and the government attorney approves it. A jury under paragraph (2) has 12 members unless the parties, with court approval, agree before the hearing ends to fewer members.
(c) Proof of Mitigating and Aggravating Factors. Despite Criminal Rule 32, no presentence report is prepared. At the hearing, the parties may present information relevant to the sentence, including any mitigating or aggravating factor that section 3592 permits or requires. If the hearing is before a jury or judge who did not hear the trial, the trial transcript and exhibits may be used, and the trial judge may also allow them. The defendant may present information about mitigating factors. The government may present information about an aggravating factor listed in its notice. Information may be admitted even if trial-evidence rules would exclude it, but the court may exclude it when its value is outweighed by unfair prejudice, confusion, or danger of misleading the jury. A victim’s attendance at or observation of the trial, when the victim is defined in section 3510, by itself is not such a danger. Both sides may rebut received information and argue whether it proves a factor and whether death is appropriate. The government argues first, the defendant replies, and the government may rebut. The government must prove each aggravating factor beyond a reasonable doubt. The defendant must prove each mitigating factor by a preponderance of the information.
(d) Return of Special Findings. The jury, or the court if there is no jury, must consider all hearing information and make special findings identifying each section 3592 aggravating factor and each noticed aggravating factor found to exist. One or more jurors may find a mitigating factor; a juror who finds one may treat it as established regardless of how many jurors agree. Every aggravating-factor finding must be unanimous. If no section 3592 aggravating factor exists, the court must impose a legally authorized sentence other than death.
(e) Finding Concerning a Sentence of Death. If (1) for a section 3591(a)(1) offense the required section 3592(b) factor exists, (2) for a section 3591(a)(2) offense the required section 3592(c) factor exists, or (3) for a section 3591(b) offense the required section 3592(d) factor exists, the jury or court must decide whether all aggravating factors sufficiently outweigh all mitigating factors to justify death. If there is no mitigating factor, it must decide whether the aggravating factors alone suffice. The jury must unanimously recommend death, life without release, or another lesser sentence; a court without a jury makes the recommendation itself.
(f) Special Precaution To Ensure Against Discrimination. In a hearing held before a jury, the court must, before the finding under subsection (e), instruct the jury not to consider the defendant’s or any victim’s race, color, religious beliefs, national origin, or sex. It may recommend death only if it would make the same recommendation regardless of those traits. Each juror must sign a certificate stating that those traits did not affect the juror’s decision and that the juror would have made the same recommendation regardless of them.
If, in a case involving an offense described in section 3591, the attorney for the government believes that the circumstances of the offense are such that a sentence of death is justified under this chapter, the attorney shall, a reasonable time before the trial or before acceptance by the court of a plea of guilty, sign and file with the court, and serve on the defendant, a notice—
stating that the government believes that the circumstances of the offense are such that, if the defendant is convicted, a sentence of death is justified under this chapter and that the government will seek the sentence of death; and
setting forth the aggravating factor or factors that the government, if the defendant is convicted, proposes to prove as justifying a sentence of death.
The factors for which notice is provided under this subsection may include factors concerning the effect of the offense on the victim and the victim’s family, and may include oral testimony, a victim impact statement that identifies the victim of the offense and the extent and scope of the injury and loss suffered by the victim and the victim’s family, and any other relevant information. The court may permit the attorney for the government to amend the notice upon a showing of good cause.
If the attorney for the government has filed a notice as required under subsection (a) and the defendant is found guilty of or pleads guilty to an offense described in section 3591, the judge who presided at the trial or before whom the guilty plea was entered, or another judge if that judge is unavailable, shall conduct a separate sentencing hearing to determine the punishment to be imposed. The hearing shall be conducted—
before the jury that determined the defendant’s guilt;
before a jury impaneled for the purpose of the hearing if—
the defendant was convicted upon a plea of guilty;
the defendant was convicted after a trial before the court sitting without a jury;
the jury that determined the defendant’s guilt was discharged for good cause; or
after initial imposition of a sentence under this section, reconsideration of the sentence under this section is necessary; or
before the court alone, upon the motion of the defendant and with the approval of the attorney for the government.
A jury impaneled pursuant to paragraph (2) shall consist of 12 members, unless, at any time before the conclusion of the hearing, the parties stipulate, with the approval of the court, that it shall consist of a lesser number.
Notwithstanding rule 32 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, when a defendant is found guilty or pleads guilty to an offense under section 3591, no presentence report shall be prepared. At the sentencing hearing, information may be presented as to any matter relevant to the sentence, including any mitigating or aggravating factor permitted or required to be considered under section 3592. Information presented may include the trial transcript and exhibits if the hearing is held before a jury or judge not present during the trial, or at the trial judge’s discretion. The defendant may present any information relevant to a mitigating factor. The government may present any information relevant to an aggravating factor for which notice has been provided under subsection (a). Information is admissible regardless of its admissibility under the rules governing admission of evidence at criminal trials except that information may be excluded if its probative value is outweighed by the danger of creating unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, or misleading the jury. For the purposes of the preceding sentence, the fact that a victim, as defined in section 3510, attended or observed the trial shall not be construed to pose a danger of creating unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, or misleading the jury. The government and the defendant shall be permitted to rebut any information received at the hearing, and shall be given fair opportunity to present argument as to the adequacy of the information to establish the existence of any aggravating or mitigating factor, and as to the appropriateness in the case of imposing a sentence of death. The government shall open the argument. The defendant shall be permitted to reply. The government shall then be permitted to reply in rebuttal. The burden of establishing the existence of any aggravating factor is on the government, and is not satisfied unless the existence of such a factor is established beyond a reasonable doubt. The burden of establishing the existence of any mitigating factor is on the defendant, and is not satisfied unless the existence of such a factor is established by a preponderance of the information.
The jury, or if there is no jury, the court, shall consider all the information received during the hearing. It shall return special findings identifying any aggravating factor or factors set forth in section 3592 found to exist and any other aggravating factor for which notice has been provided under subsection (a) found to exist. A finding with respect to a mitigating factor may be made by 1 or more members of the jury, and any member of the jury who finds the existence of a mitigating factor may consider such factor established for purposes of this section regardless of the number of jurors who concur that the factor has been established. A finding with respect to any aggravating factor must be unanimous. If no aggravating factor set forth in section 3592 is found to exist, the court shall impose a sentence other than death authorized by law.
If, in the case of—
an offense described in section 3591(a)(1), an aggravating factor required to be considered under section 3592(b) is found to exist;
an offense described in section 3591(a)(2), an aggravating factor required to be considered under section 3592(c) is found to exist; or
an offense described in section 3591(b), an aggravating factor required to be considered under section 3592(d) is found to exist,
the jury, or if there is no jury, the court, shall consider whether all the aggravating factor or factors found to exist sufficiently outweigh all the mitigating factor or factors found to exist to justify a sentence of death, or, in the absence of a mitigating factor, whether the aggravating factor or factors alone are sufficient to justify a sentence of death. Based upon this consideration, the jury by unanimous vote, or if there is no jury, the court, shall recommend whether the defendant should be sentenced to death, to life imprisonment without possibility of release or some other lesser sentence.
In a hearing held before a jury, the court, prior to the return of a finding under subsection (e), shall instruct the jury that, in considering whether a sentence of death is justified, it shall not consider the race, color, religious beliefs, national origin, or sex of the defendant or of any victim and that the jury is not to recommend a sentence of death unless it has concluded that it would recommend a sentence of death for the crime in question no matter what the race, color, religious beliefs, national origin, or sex of the defendant or of any victim may be. The jury, upon return of a finding under subsection (e), shall also return to the court a certificate, signed by each juror, that consideration of the race, color, religious beliefs, national origin, or sex of the defendant or any victim was not involved in reaching his or her individual decision and that the individual juror would have made the same recommendation regarding a sentence for the crime in question no matter what the race, color, religious beliefs, national origin, or sex of the defendant or any victim may be.
Source credit: (Added Pub. L. 103–322, title VI, § 60002(a), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1964; amended Pub. L. 105–6, § 2(c), Mar. 19, 1997, 111 Stat. 12; Pub. L. 107–273, div. B, title IV, § 4002(e)(8), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1810.)
- 1994Enacted · Pub. L. 103-322 · 108 Stat. 1964
- 1997Amended · Pub. L. 105-6 · 111 Stat. 12
- 2002Amended · Pub. L. 107-273 · 116 Stat. 1810
A history note hasn’t been published yet. The record shows enactment by Pub. L. 103-322 on 1994-09-13.
all 0 arguments · sorted by: best
no arguments yet — make the first case