RAPID: Impact of Changing Death Penalty Unanimity Requirements on Case Decisions

佛罗里达州最近宣布立法，将修改陪审团死刑量刑要求。具体来说，虽然以前陪审团必须一致建议判处死刑，而不是判处终身不得假释，但新规则只需要12名陪审员中的8名投票赞成死刑即可建议判处死刑。虽然先前的研究表明，可以预见的是，死刑判决更有可能根据多数规则而不是一票通过规则作出，但量刑决定规则与审前决策之间的关系（例如，（接受辩诉交易）不太清楚。人们可能会认为，降低死刑建议所需的陪审员人数，从而使死刑判决更有可能，将增加被接受的辩诉交易的数量。然而，有理论上的理由相信，相反的情况可能会发生。不同的决策理论会认为转向不认罪对审前决定有不同的影响，有些人认为接受的辩诉交易会减少，有些人认为接受的辩诉交易会增加。与此特别相关的是审判阴影理论和前景理论，随着死刑风险的增加，它们做出了相反的预测。拟议的研究旨在澄清我们的理论和现实世界的理解的影响，审前决定的一致性规则。具体来说，我们将收集佛罗里达州一级谋杀案的真实数据，无论是在拟议的修改生效之前还是之后。通过这项研究获得的知识直接告知法律的行为者，包括辩护律师和检察官作出的决定。跟踪立法变化对各个阶段的法律的体系的影响非常重要，因为这可以为其他可能考虑类似变化的司法管辖区做出的决定提供信息。该奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并且通过使用基金会的知识价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

Florida recently announced legislation that will revise jury death penalty sentencing requirements. Specifically, while previously a jury had to be unanimous to recommend a death sentence versus a sentence of life without parole, the new rule requires only a majority eight of 12 jurors to vote for death to recommend the death penalty. Although research has previously shown that, predictably, death penalty decisions are more likely under a majority rule than a unanimity rule, the relationship between the sentencing decision rule and pre-trial decision-making (e.g., accepting a plea bargain) is less clear. One might assume that lowering the number of jurors required for a recommendation of death, thereby making a death sentence more likely, would increase the number of plea bargains accepted. However, there are theoretical reasons to believe that the opposite might happen. Different theories of decision-making would argue for different impacts of a shift to non-unanimity on pre-trial decisions, with some arguing for a decrease in plea bargains accepted and some an increase in plea bargains accepted. Of particular relevance here are Shadow of the Trial theory and Prospect Theory, which make opposite predictions as the risk of a death sentence increases. The proposed study seeks to clarify our theoretical and real-world understanding of the impact of unanimity rules on pre-trial decisions. Specifically, we will gather real-world data on first-degree murder cases in the state of Florida both before and after the proposed change goes into effect in a few months. The knowledge gained through this research directly informs decisions made by legal actors, including defense attorneys and prosecutors. It is important to track the impact of legislative changes on the legal system at all stages, as this can inform decisions made in other jurisdictions that may be considering similar changes.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.