False Deterrent? An analysis of Death Penalty Filings in PennsylvaniaGalley, Ethan Capital PunishmentDeterrenceBrutalizationCounty-level AnalysisCriminologyB ATo date, prior research on the relationship between capital punishment and homicide has remained largely inconclusive. At best, the current literature yields mixed evidence, often suggesting either a deterrence effect, a null effect, a brutalization effect, or an admixture depending on model, sample, and statistical techniques used. One such reason for this inconsistency is how this relationship is measured; much of the literature has relied on measurements either 1) following executions or 2) involving the wider presence of death penalty statutes. Notably, national declines in capital sentencing and executions continue to affect the statistical power of these measures. Likewise, as several states have opted toward gubernatorial moratoriums, any measured effect may become volatile to state-specific sanction trends. To this end, it would help to not only take stock of where the current literature lies, but more closely investigate the initial components of capital sentencing, specifically with regard to prosecutorial decisions to seek capital punishment. As such, the present study seeks to analyze the effect of prosecutors’ death penalty filings and subsequent sentencing decisions on county homicide counts, focusing on Pennsylvania. Using multivariate analysis of longitudinal data on homicides between the years 2000-2010, this study aims to assess if, at its initial onset, prosecutors’ seeking the death penalty, and subsequent sentences, yield any measurable association with deterrence. Given the contemporary shift towards moratoriums and the absence of executions within Pennsylvania, such an analysis is warranted.Jeffrey Todd Ulmer, Thesis SupervisorGary J Adler, Jr., Thesis Honors Advisoropen_access2025-04-02T03:55:54Zhttps://honors.libraries.psu.edu/catalog/9826emg6053