U.S. Department of Justice 

Bureau of Justice Statistics 

Death-row Prisoners·· 1981 ~ \' 

The death-row population in the United during the 1970's. During the previous 

States swelled to 838 persons by yearend ~~ decade, opponents of the death penalty 

1981-150 more than at yearend 1980. It had stepped up their use of litigation to 

was by far the largest group awaiting block the execution of death-row prisonexecution since a national count began in ers, actions that largely were r2sponsible 

1953. The cause 01' this huge accumula- for the moratorium that bega~ in 1907. 

tion of condemned prisoners was a 3 to 1 

ratio of persons receiving the death Then, in the 1972 watershed case of 

penalty to those removed from death row Furman vs. Georgia, the U.S. Supreme 

during 1981. Among the latter was an Court ruled that the death penalty had 

Indiana prisoner who was executed in often been used in an arbitrary and 

March 1981, the fourth person to suffer capricious manner, thereby violating 

the deathcpellalty since an unofficial Eighth Amendment guarantees against 

10-year moratoriu1p on executions ended cruel and unusual punishment. All of the 

in 1977. - 600 persons sentenced under pre-Furman 

A decade of decisions 

The relatively small group, 74 in all, 

relieved of the death sentence during 

1981 reflected increasingly successf;Jl 

efforts of State legislatures to adapt 

ca.pital punishment laws to guidelines 

established by the U.S. Supreme Court 

lawsand~awaiting death were eventually 

removed from death row. But the accumulation began again as many States moved 

quickly to revise their capital punishment 

statutes to meet objections raised by the 

Court. 

The new laws generally were of two 

types. Some States sought to eliminate 

Number of persons on aeath_fQ.\V, yearend 1968-81 

Number 

::====. ==1=1 !=~ =G1 700~:-__ -:-_~,~ __ -_-~-_~_-_-___ --+-~,~-=-_-+--~~--~---+----+----+--~--~4-)I'--~---4 

600VV 1\ /v 

500 \ J"" ~V 400 \ / 

300 

200~ __ ~ __ +-__ +-__ ~~~4-~/~V __ -+ __ -+ __ ~~~ ____ ~ __ ~~ \V 100~--~---+----+----r--~----4----+----~--~---+--~+---~--~ 

OL-__ ~ __ ~ ____ L-__ -L __ -J ____ ~ ___ -L __ ~L-__ J-__ -L ____ L-__ ~ __ ~ 

1968 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 

" 

any chance of unfair treatm,ent by making 

the death penalty mandatory for speCified 

crimes, contSngE'nt solely on a finding of 

guilt. A seccnrl type went beyond the 

July 1982 

The United States will witness a 

spate of executions beginning in 

1983-84 without parallel in this Nation 

since the depression era. Whatever 

views one may hold on the use of 

capital punishment, that is the reality 

behind the numbers presented hereboth those dealing with prisoners on 

death row and the number of State 

capital punishment statutes that have 

passed Federal or State constitutional 

muster. 

The number of persons on death row 

has been rising steadily for 5 years; only 

four persons were executed during this 

period, three of whom chose not to 

exhaust their avenues of appeal. A 

similar buildup on death row occurred 

during the sixties, but these persons 

were all removed from the threat of 

capital punishment as a result of the 

Supreme Court decision in Furman vs. 

Georgia. 

Now again time is running out for a 

large proportion of individuals awaiting 

capital punishment. States have 

draftedand redrafted capital punishment measures and the Supreme Court 

is overturning fewer and fewer on 

Eighth Amendinent or other constitutional grounds. Further, many 

death-row residents are exhausting 

thair appeal process under these 

statutes. Thus the situation is ripe for 

the Nation to witness executions at a 

rate approaching the more than three 

per week that prevailed during the 

1930's. We will then have a grim arena 

in which to conduct our national debate 

on the efficacy of the death penalty. 

Benjamin H. Renshaw III 

Acting Director 

, 

. 

b 

.. 

Q 

, 
n • 

= 2 

:1 i, Status of cleath penalty statutes a,nd prisoners under sentence of death, 

by region and State, 1981 --"-

Death Prisoners Changes during 1981 Pr1sol1e.r~ 

penalty under Received under 

in force sentence under Removed: sentence as of " of death death from of dE!ath 

Region and State 12/31/81 12/31/80 sentence death row Executed 12/31/81 

United States ... 688 228 '17 1 1 838 

Male .. . 679 225 76 1 827 

Female ... 9 3 1 0 11 

Federa12 Yes 0 0 0 0 0 

State ... 688 22R 77 1 1!3/! ':"! 

Northeast ... 7 5 1 0 11 

Maine No 0 0 0 0 0 

New Hampshire Yes 0 0 0 0 0 

Vermont Yes 0 0 0 0 0 

Massachusetts No 0 0 0 0 0 

Rhode Island No 0 0 0 0 0 

Connectieut Yes 0 0 0 0 0 

New York Yes 0 0 0 0 0 

New Jersey No 0 0 0 0 0 

Penns)::lvania Yes 7 5 1 0 11 

North Central .... 54 25 1 1 77 

Ohill"' Yes 0 0 0 0 0 

Indiana Yes (i 5 0 1 10 

Illinois Yes 31 11 - 1 0 41 

Michigen No 0 0 0 0 0 

Wisconsin No 0 0 0 0 0 

Minnesota No 0 0 0 0 0 

Iowa No 0 0 0 0 0 

Missouri Yes 7 7 0 0 14 

North Dakota No 0 0 0 0 " 0 

South Dakota Yes 0 0 0 0 0 

Nebraska Yes 10 2 0 0 12 

Kansas No 0 0 0 0 0 

South ... 522 141 58 0 605 

Delaw'lre Yes 3 1 0 0 4' 

Maryland Yes 2 -; 1 0 8 

District of Columbia No 0 0 0 0 0 

Virginia Yes 13 5 1 0 17 

West Virginia No 0 0 0 0 0 

North Carolina Yes 15 5 3 0 17 

South Carolina Yes 14 8 1 0 21 

Georgia Yes 87 5 1 0 91 

Florida Yes 155 24 II! 0 161 

Kentuck)> Yes 5 4 0 0 9 

Tennessee Yes 15 8 2 0 21 

Alabama Yes 2 14 0 0 16 

Mississippi Yes (,' 14 ,13 0 0 27 

Arkansas Yes 1~ 12 4 0 23 

Louisiana ,Yes 12 0 2 0 10 

Oklahoma Yes 30 9 3 0 36 

Texas Yes 140 26 22 0 144 

West . . . :~ 105 57 17 0 145 

Montana Yes 3 0 0 0 3 

Idaho Yes 1 2 1 0 2 

Wyoming Yes 1 0 1 0 0 

Colorado Yes 0 1 0 0 1 

New "Iexico Yes 1 2 0 0 3 

Arizona Yes 33 8 3 0 38 

Utah Yes 4 0 1 0 3 

Nevada Yes 10 4 2 0 12 

washin§ton3 Yes 5 0 5 0 0 

Oregon No 3 0 3 0 0 

California Yes 44 40 1 0 A3 

Alaska No 0 0 0 0 0 

Hawaii No 0 0 0 0 0 

NOTE: Some of the figures for yearend to the NPS progr~m or were not the in 

1980 are revised from those shown in custody of relevant correctional authorCapital Punishment, 1980 (final report), itieG by December 31, 1981. 

December 1981. These figures exclude 46 

inmates (42 in Alabama, ,tnd 1 each in lInc1udes 1 Florida prisoner who ComArizona, Georgia, Illinois, and Louisiana) mitted suicide and 2 Texas prisoners 

relieved of the death sentence before who cied of natural causes. 1981 and the inclusion of 20 ~nmates (8 in 2Excludes 4 prisoners held under Armed 

Georgia, 2 in Florida, 1 in Texas, 2 in 'Forces ju!'isdiction. 

Mississippi, 6 in Louisiana, and·l in 1rrye death penalty was in effect for 

Virginia) who, although sentenced to death " ,ni::; part of the year in Ohio, Oregon" 

before' 1981" were eUher reported late a-..d Washington. See text. 

2 /' 

.. 

issue of guilt to the circumstances of the 

crime. 

In 1976, the U.S. Supreme Court ~'uled 

on five cases that became the benchmark 

for subsequent capital punishment laws. 

I!l two of these-Woodson vs. North 

Caroiina and Roberts vs. Louisiana-the 

Court struck down statutes that imposed 

mandatory death sentences without due 

consideration of other factors. In the 

other three cases,however--Gregg vs. 

Georgia, Proffitt vs. Florida, and ~ 

vs. Texas-the Court upheld death penalty 

laws that allowed the judge or jury, 

subject to stipulated guidelines, to weigh 

both aggravating and mitigating circumstances in passing sentence. Based on 

these rulings, most States have adopted 

laws that cart fully define the elements of 

a capital crime and provide for guided 

discretion in determining the sentence. 

-, Since 1976, the U.S. Supreme Court has 

scrutinized the details of many cases 

involving capital punishment, but has 

chosen relatively few for formal review. 

The most significant of these decisions -was Coker vs. Georgia (I 977) in which the 

Court held that rape of an adult woman 

was not grave enough to warrant the 

death penalty. As a result of this 

decision, virtually all capital penalties 

now in effect are for specified homicides 

or for specified felonies that result in 

death; those for other offenses have not 

had their constitutionality tested. 

Currently, all death-row inmates are 

convicted of homicide: except for two 

Florida inmates convicted of ''sexual 

battery of a female child age 11 or under." 

Current developments 

By yearend 1981, at least four cases 

were awaiting a review by the High 

Court, while an important decision on the 

legal rights of capital prisoners was 

rendered in May of that year. In ~ 

vs. Smith, the Court ruled that psychiatric testimony derived from the pretrial 

competency hearing of a Texas prisoner 

could not be used by the prosecution 

during toe penalty phase of the proceedings, since in that hearing the defendant 

had not been warned of hh right to 

remain silent and to retain counsel. The 

decision, which touches on a judicial 

practice common in Texas, could 

eventually affect as many as half of that 

State's death-row prisoners. 

The supreme courts of individual States 

als,o handed down important rulings during 

1981. Two such rulings resulted in the 

removal of all prisoners from death row in , two States. 

Oregon's supreme court, in Oregon vs. 

Quinn, ruled that the State's death 

penalty law was unconstitutional because 

it placed the resp,onsibility for deciding a 

defendant's mentill state on the judge 

rather than the jury, in effect depriving 

1 

the accused of the right to a jury trial. 

As Ii result of this ruling, the death sentences of all three of Oregon's death-row 

inmates were vacated. 

Washington's capital punishment law 

also was struck down by its supreme 

court. In ~ vs. Frampton, the court 

found that the defendant, who pleaded not 

guilty, could be sentenced to death, 

whereas defendants who pleaded guilty 

could not because the law did not provide 

for a sentencing jury in such cases • 

Frampton's death sentence was changed 

to life imprisonment, and the court 

vacated the death sentences of the State's 

remaining four death-row inmates, whose 

cases also were on appeal. A month later, 

in May 1981, the Washington legislature 

replaced the unconstitutional law with 

one designed to overcome the defect. 

In other legislative actions taken during 

1981, one State created a new capital 

offense, one State reenacted its death 

penalty law, and four revised existing 

ones. Oklahoma, which already had the 

death penalty for murder, passed a law 

making rape of a minor or mental incompetent a capital offense. Ohio passed a 

new capital punishment law to replace 

one ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. 

Supreme Court in 1978 (Lockett vs. 

Ohio). The law had put undue limitations 

Oii'the circumstances that the sentencing 

authority could consider in its deliberation. Alabama, in response to thei 1980 

decision rendered by its supreme court in 

Beck \IS. Alabama, also revised its death 

penalty law. The new law allows the jury 

to convict a defendant of lesser crimes 

rather than, as provided by the original 

law, only the capital offense. It also 

establishes a dual trial procedure, one for 

determining guilt and one for sentencing, 

as well as a mandatory appellate review. 

Connecticut, Texas, and Virginia made 

minor changes in their death penalty laws 

before the end of the year. 

In 1981 for the first time, States 

reported whether their death penalty laws 

provided for automatic appeal from death 

sentences. With the exception of 

Arkansas, New York, and the Federal 

system, the statutes of all jurisdictions 

call for an automatic appeal, even if the 

defendant wished to waive the right. 

Some State laws provide for review of the 

sentence only; others require a review of 

both conviction and sentence. 

Death sentences in 1981 

With Ohio added to the list of States 

that permit capital punishment and 

Oregon removed from it, the total number 

of States (36) that had the death penalty 

in effect at yearend 1981 was the same as 

a year earlier. Of the 28 States with 

prisoners awaiting execution at y~arend 

1981, 25 had handed down the death 

penalty at least O'1ce during the year. 

~""'------' 

(. 

Number of persons executed, by year, 1930-81 

Total: 3,863 

Number 

200r-'~-r7T--r-.--r-.-'r-.--r-.--r-.--.-.--r-.--.~--r-.--r·~--r-'-~ 

175r-+-~:~r'~~\~--~+-1-~-4--r-+-~-+-4--~+-1-~-4--~+-1-~-4--4 

150~l V \ • 

1251--/-t-t-+-\~/+~\I-1I-'\-+-+--+-+-HH--+-+--I--I-+-+--+-+----I-+-l 

100r-~.+-+-+-;---r-r~-+-+i\-HTAH--r-+-+~~~r-~+-+-~~-r-+~--4 1/' 75r-+-;--r-+-;--r-+-;-~~--~~~~r-+-1-'~-+~--r-+-~~-4--+-1--1 

V '[\ 50r-+-~-+-;~+-;--+-;--t-;--+-;--+-~~J~r-+-~-+-;--+-4--+-;r-+-~ 

""\ 25r-+-~-+-;--t-;--+-;--t-;--+-;--+-;--+-;~-+-;--+-;--+-4--+-;r-+-~ 

?9~370~~-L~~1~9~470~-L~--~~1795=0~-J--L-~~19~6~0~~-3~L-l~97-0~ ',- ... -J--~~~19~8~OLJ 

Florida had more persons (I 61) awaiting 

execution than any other State; next were 

Texas (I 44) and Georgia (91). These three 

States held close to half of all pl'isoners 

on death row in the Nation. 

Among States that contributed to the 

net increase of 150 prisoners, California's 

growth (from 44 to 83) was the largest. 

N ext were Alabama (14) and Mississippi 

(13). No other State added more than 10, 

and five States (Louisiana, Oregon, Utah, 

Washington, and Wyoming) decreased the 

number of persons they had awaiting 

execution. 

BlaCks accounted for 4.i 96 of the 

Nation's death-row population-about the 

same proportion as a year earlier. 

Members of races other than white or 

black accounted for 196. 

Eleven women were under sentence of 

death at yearend 1981, two more than the 

year before. Maryland, Georgia, and 

Alabama each sentenced one woman 

during the year; one woman was relieved 

of the death penalty in Florida. All 11 

women on death row were in southern 

States-4 in Georgia, 2 in Texas, and 1 

each in Maryland, North Carolina, Kentucky, Alabama, and Oklahoma'. Eight 

were white; three were black. 

The number of Hispanics sentenced to 

die rose to 47-2196 more than in 1980. 

Fourteen received new sentences; only six 

were relieved of the death sentence. 

Texas held the most Hispanics (I 6); next 

were California (I2), Florida and Arizona 

(5 each), Dlinois (4), and Virginia, 

Arkansas, New Mexico, Utah, and Nevada 

(I each). 

The number of new de'lth-row inmates 

(228) represented a 1696'lncl'ease over the 

number sentenced in 1980 and was one of 

3 

the highest figures reported for the 

decade. California imposed the most new sent~nces (40) followed by Texas (26) and 

Florida (24). None of the other 22 States 

that handed down sentences during the 

year added more than 14. 

For every three persons added to death 

row during 1981, oniy one was relieved of 

the death sentence. Texas granted the 

most dispositions (22), followed by Florida 

(l S). All death-row inmates in Oregon 

and Washington were relieved of their 

death sentences as a result of State 

supreme court decisions. No other State 

relieved more than four prisoners of the 

death penalty. 

The national total of 78 removals from 

death row included 1 execution in Indiana, 

I suicide in Florida, and 2 natural deaths 

in Texas. Since 1971, 29 prisoners have 

died while on death row, most from 

natural causes. Four died by execution, 

and at least five committed suicide • 

Methodological not~ 

Data on persons under sentence of 

death are collected annually for the 

Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletins 

are prepared principally by the staff 

of the bureau. Carol B. Kalish, chief 

of policy analysis, edits the bulletins. 

Marilyn Marbrook, head of the 

publications unit, administers bulletin 

publication, assisted by Scott G. 

Alexander and Julie A. Ferguson. 

Susan Schechter-Ryan of the Bureau 

of the ,Census is the principal author 

of this bulletin. 

. NCJ-83191, July 1982 

C' 

... 
f' 

!I 

~ 

- ---....... --.~"'""C' •. .;.-' . 

cw . 

Bureau of Justice Statistics by the U.S. 

Bl!reau'of theC~nsus as part of the 

NationlUPrisoner Statistics (NPS) program~ Data are obtained 'from the 

departments of corrections in each of the 

50 States and the District of Columbia. ' . The Bureau of Justice Statistics gratefully acknowledges the cooperation of State 

officials whose generous assistance and 

unfailing patience make National Prisoner 

Statistics possible~ 

Statistics in this series may vary from 

other dea~p-row counts for any of the 

following 'reasons: 

• Persons are not added to the N PS 

U.S. Department of Justice 

Bureau of Justice Statistics 

Washington, D.C. 20531· 

Bulletin 

: , •. "t~, .. :: 

~:~~~~~:nc~~~:!n~~:~~:i~et~~et~ir:he .;:i{f~rl~~r·r~li~i?ff. 

"''1 

"1 / /~ . 

-' 

J. 

condemned person is received by the'i::~~'-fi fir\~1;.repor:t:9n the death-row 

appropriate correctional authCi'ity. .Y,yW;i-PJllationin 1981 Will be l<,ublished in late 

• Inmates sentenced to dep:,h underf\}1I82. 'To obtaiil, the :fina:l t@80 report, 

I (~CapitallPunishmlmt 1980,~CJ-78600, or statuto!'~'provisions la,ter found \!tt() be a)Jdedto the bUlletin-mailing list, 

unconstitutional are removed from the ·t~'ildte to the ;National CriiniriiHJustice death-row count on the date of the ' '" . . relevant court finding rather than on the ··::·W.~ference Servi~~, Box 6000,R:c:,ckville, 

dates the finding is applied to individual 'v~:'I'i,~~:t9~50. 0th~!~'j,N_ational Prisorter.· . ~~~stIcs Bulle~m!f1n~Jude- .. ' cases··.~ferans in Priso)f~ Octo bar 1981, --. • NPS deatn-row counts are always as of NO;lt7)1Z32; .,.Y .... ,;:-

the last day of the calendar year and will • ' hli,and Prisoners January. 1 982, 

therefore differ from estimates made for NC OS;~ -

more recent periods. • f!:...~lll\:S,;'in 1981, May 1982, NCJ-82262 • 

'11~i' ~< 

Official Business 

Penalty for Private Use. $300 Postage and Fees Paid 

U.S. Depattment of1ustice 

Jus 436 . 

TIllRD CLASS 

BULKMTE 

.~.{-. 

i-s~\" .', 

~·~tt~c.c . ," 

: ' 

, 

f" 

, '.. .. 

I I 

. I 

...... ;. 

".: j 

~ -- . 

I 'f -".-,.-' 

" 

, 

. ,._3 ." '. + 

,C'!, 

. \ \. 

,: ,.~ 

.t, __ 

.\ 
~l \1 

" 

...... Ji 

'." ,\\ 

r '(,) ~", 

.1 

o 

Ii 

\, 

\1. '~ , 

" 

" <) 

o 

., 

o 

, . 

'0 :'2 

•. 1/ 

...•. . . .' 

\:~;~ .. ':"', _______ .;. ___________ .;..;._...;. ___ .;;.....;. .... ...:....;.,...;.; .... ...;.~....:·).:·;... __ ..:..:L ____________________ ~_ ..... _~ __ ~~_~_'__= ___ _ ~""'!I .',.,'J_ '~,-

., 

-1 

1 

" "'" 

'e,;). 

" 

\: 

,. 

.. 

~ .' • I 

i~ 

I': 

j 

r 

Ii 

I" 

r 

.~ ' .. 

":',i,"[ ':',i'\' .~.~ 

= ~",-.'-~