Opinion ID: 1057701
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 41

Heading: Discrimination Based on Location of the Offense

Text: Mr. Banks also insists that Tennessee's death penalty is unconstitutional because of the variance in its application among different counties in the State of Tennessee. He specifically notes that although only 15% of the State's population resides in Shelby County, 40% of the population on death row results from Shelby County prosecutions. Additionally, Mr. Banks asserts that Shelby, Davidson, Knox, Madison, Hamilton, and Sullivan Counties, though representing only 42% of the State's population, are responsible for approximately 69% of the death sentences. Mr. Banks's argument on this point erroneously assumes that variance from a random demographic result is necessarily arbitrary. However, a clearer inspection of the geographic variance in the application of the death penalty in Tennessee suggests that Mr. Banks's statistical argument is misleading. While approximately 16% of the State's population resides in Shelby County, [61] consistently more than 30% of all the murders reported in Tennessee between 2001 and 2007 are committed in Shelby County. [62] In fact, the number of murders reported in Shelby County each year averaged over 35% of the murders reported in the entire State during that period. Thus, the actual number of murders reported in Shelby County corresponds with the 39% of death row inmates from Shelby County. Similarly, while only approximately 42% of the State's population resides in Davidson, Hamilton, Knox, Madison, Shelby, and Sullivan Counties, these counties consistently account for more than 60% of the murders reported in the State of Tennessee between 2001 and 2007. [63] They have occasionally accounted for more than 70% of the murders reported in Tennessee. [64] Mr. Banks estimates the number of death row inmates from these counties as 69%. If that is the case, the percentage of murders reported in these counties closely approximates the percentage of defendants on death row from these counties. [65] Mr. Banks's arguments based on the location of the offense fail to factor in the influence of prosecutorial discretion. As can be seen, they also suffer from a lack of factual support. Accordingly, Mr. Banks has failed to present sufficient evidence to demonstrate that he received the death penalty because he was from Shelby County. To the contrary, the jury sentenced Mr. Banks to death because he murdered Mr. Al-Maily in the perpetration of a robbery and for the purpose of avoiding, interfering with, or preventing a lawful arrest or prosecution. G.