Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly Volume 16 Article 4 Number 1 Fall 1988 1-1-1988 Do Judicial Scarlet Letters Violate the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause of the Eight Amendment Gregory M. Brown Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/ hastings_constitutional_law_quaterly Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Recommended Citation Gregory M. Brown, Do Judicial Scarlet Letters Violate the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause of the Eight Amendment, 16 Hastings Const. L.Q. 115 (1988). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_constitutional_law_quaterly/vol16/iss1/4 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact
[email protected]. NOTE Do Judicial "Scarlet Letters" Violate the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause of .the Eighth Amendment? "[A] penalty which, in our days, would infer a degree of mocking infamy and ridicule, might then be invested with almost as stem a dignity as the punishment of death itself."1 Introduction In an attempt to reduce escalating correctional facility costs and prison overcrowding as well as find a more effective form of punishment, some trial judges have begun imposing "scarlet letter" probation condi- tions on convicted defendants. These creative sentences can be effective punishments2 because they expose individuals involved in "antisocial" conduct to public scrutiny.' In three recently decided cases, Goldschmitt' v. State,4 State v. Kirby,5 and State v. Bateman,6 judges imposed scarlet letter probation conditions upon the convicted defendants.