Adding insult to injury?: the untoward impact of requiring more than de minimis injury in an Eighth Amendment excessive force case.

IF 1 3区 社会学 Q2 LAW Fordham Law Review Pub Date : 2009-05-01
Robyn D Hoffman
{"title":"Adding insult to injury?: the untoward impact of requiring more than de minimis injury in an Eighth Amendment excessive force case.","authors":"Robyn D Hoffman","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This Note explores the conflict over whether a prisoner must suffer more than de minimis injury to sustain an Eighth Amendment excessive force claim. It examines this conflict against the backdrop of the various standards the U.S. Supreme Court adopted in its Eighth Amendment prison conditions jurisprudence between 1976 and 1992, principally focusing on the 1992 Hudson v. McMillian decision. Moreover, this Note considers the intersection of \"the evolving standards of decency,\" the \"hands-off doctrine,\" and the Eighth Amendment injury requirement. Ultimately, this Note advocates that excessive force--when meted out as punishment--violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment regardless of whether a prisoner's injuries are more than de minimis.</p>","PeriodicalId":47517,"journal":{"name":"Fordham Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fordham Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This Note explores the conflict over whether a prisoner must suffer more than de minimis injury to sustain an Eighth Amendment excessive force claim. It examines this conflict against the backdrop of the various standards the U.S. Supreme Court adopted in its Eighth Amendment prison conditions jurisprudence between 1976 and 1992, principally focusing on the 1992 Hudson v. McMillian decision. Moreover, this Note considers the intersection of "the evolving standards of decency," the "hands-off doctrine," and the Eighth Amendment injury requirement. Ultimately, this Note advocates that excessive force--when meted out as punishment--violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment regardless of whether a prisoner's injuries are more than de minimis.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
雪上加霜?在第八修正案的过度使用武力案件中,要求超过轻微伤害的不利影响。
本说明探讨了囚犯是否必须遭受超过轻微伤害才能支持第八修正案过度使用武力的主张的冲突。本文以1976年至1992年间美国最高法院在其第八修正案监狱条件判例中采用的各种标准为背景,主要关注1992年哈德逊诉麦克米伦案的判决,考察了这一冲突。此外,本说明还考虑了“不断发展的得体标准”、“不干涉原则”和《第八修正案》伤害要求之间的交集。最后,本照会主张,过度使用武力——当作为惩罚时——违反了第八修正案禁止残忍和不寻常的惩罚的规定,无论囚犯的伤害是否超过了轻微程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Fordham Law Review is a scholarly journal serving the legal profession and the public by discussing current legal issues. Approximately 75 articles, written by students or submitted by outside authors, are published each year. Each volume comprises six books, three each semester, totaling over 3,000 pages. Managed by a board of up to eighteen student editors, the Law Review is a working journal, not merely an honor society. Nevertheless, Law Review membership is considered among the highest scholarly achievements at the Law School.
期刊最新文献
Using a Hybrid Securities Test to Tackle the Problem of Pyramid Fraud Resurrecting Free Speech Managing the Misinformation Marketplace: The First Amendment and the Fight Against Fake News Airbnb in New York City: whose privacy rights are threatened by a Government Data grab? Free money, but not tax-free: a proposal for the tax treatment of cryptocurrency hard forks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1