Oct. 15 TENNESSEE: Events have raised doubts about fairness in system In my former roles as the attorney general for the state of Tennessee and a United States attorney, I have made decisions affecting the life and liberty of our fellow citizens. Once I took the oath of office for those positions, I attempted to follow the law, irrespective of my personal feelings. But over the past 5 years, several events have caused me to have doubts about the fairness and reliability of the administration of the death penalty in Tennessee and to join together with others to look for ways to improve it. Most recently, I served on the American Bar Association's Tennessee Death Penalty Assessment Team, which conducted a three-year study of the death penalty in Tennessee. In a report issued in April of this year, the committee found that Tennessee fails to comply with most of the nationally recognized standards required for a fair and accurate death penalty system. Many of these shortcomings are substantial and serious. They illustrate the need for a meaningful and comprehensive review to ascertain how to improve the fairness and accuracy of the Tennessee capital punishment system. Fortunately, the General Assembly has legislatively mandated a study of our state's death penalty. The Committee to Study the Administration of the Death Penalty is charged with issuing "recommendations designed to make capital punishment in Tennessee uniform in its application and administration so that the capital process is free from bias and error." The bipartisan committee is composed of legislators, representatives of the governor, district attorneys, criminal defense lawyers and experts from various associations who are stakeholders in the criminal justice system. With this committee, Tennessee has a great opportunity to address the serious flaws of its capital punishment system. This is no small order, and cannot be taken lightly. Tennessee is not alone in its need to undertake a study of this breadth and depth. Other reviews have been conducted on the state and national levels, and we have good examples to learn from. It is clear that the current system is not working - not for victims' families who wait decades for closure, not for defendants whose lives are at stake in an imperfect system, and not for society at large. It is in everyone's best interest that Tennessee move toward a more fair and accurate system. If the work of the committee is open, detailed and broad in scope, as it should be, it could lead to real improvements in the fairness and reliability of the death penalty system. In a society of laws governing issues of life and death, an improved system is imperative if we are to be true to Tennessee's ideals of justice. (source: Opinion, The Tennesean -- W.J. Michael Cody is a partner with the Memphis law firm of Burch Porter & Johnson and was U.S. attorney for the Western District of Tennessee 1977-1981 and Tennessee attorney general 1984-1988.) *********************************** Perhaps, new study will prove valuable For over 30 years, I have served the United States and Tennessee. As a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit and a United States attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee, I reviewed many death penalty cases and have made it a point to study death penalty law. I served as a member of the American Bar Association's Tennessee Assessment Team, which issued a report earlier this year assessing Tennessee's death penalty system. Recent death penalty cases from Tennessee show a continued decline in the accuracy and fairness of the state's capital punishment system. The administration of the death penalty nationwide remains broken and arbitrary, and that seems particularly true in Tennessee. Some who have been condemned to death are, in fact, innocent of the crime charged. There is a consistent pattern of ineffective assistance of defense counsel, prosecutorial misconduct and other serious constitutional errors. Addressing a critical problem The judicial administration of the death penalty is by far the most difficult, time-consuming, frustrating, and critical joint problem that the Tennessee and federal judiciary have to grapple with on a daily basis. Our current system consumes enormous public resources, involving many years of sustained work by state prosecutors, state defenders, state judges, federal defenders and federal judges. Unfortunately, until now neither the Tennessee General Assembly, the judiciary, nor the governor's office has taken any serious steps toward correcting obvious problems. Perhaps this will change. The General Assembly has commissioned a study committee to seriously examine capital punishment in Tennessee. When the Committee to Study the Administration of the Death Penalty convenes later this month, it will be charged with a thorough examination of the death penalty and its administration and, in the end, offer recommendations for change. Of course, studying Tennessee's death penalty administration process is not new. The report from the ABA Assessment Team found that Tennessee's system fails to meet a majority of nationally recognized standards. In 2002, another distinguished committee of the Tennessee Bar Association was appointed to examine issues surrounding the effective assistance of defense counsel in Tennessee capital cases. The committee also found that "Tennessee is woefully out of step with the national (American Bar Association) standards" in death cases. Effective assistance of counsel is neither uniformly nor consistently provided to individuals facing the death penalty in this state. Concerns over budget have often trumped the need for competent, well-compensated and adequately prepared counsel. If Tennessee is to have a fair and accurate death penalty system, then the system must be changed in a number of respects. The legislatively created Committee to Study the Administration of the Death Penalty offers some hope that our state might be taking the first step toward needed reform. (source: The Tennessean -- Judge Gilbert Merritt serves as a member of the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals) ********************************************************** Review can offer assurance to citizens The issue before the legislatively created study committee is to review Tennessee's current practices of administering capital punishment to ensure the proper administration of the death penalty and of the legal process that is utilized within our judicial system. The legislative review is not required by law; nor was the review necessitated by a court decision or motivated by concerns of special interest groups. In theory and in practice, our civilization is ultimately controlled by the citizens through our republic form of government. The citizens of Tennessee have made it clear that the use of capital punishment is strongly supported as a just punishment for those who commit heinous crimes against our citizens. Thus, the question of whether Tennessee will maintain capital punishment on our law books is not at issue. It is incumbent upon our citizens and upon government to continually monitor and review the judicial system's application and administration of Tennessee's capital punishment laws and process. Accordingly, this study of capital punishment in Tennessee will review the issue for the next year. Sub-issues involved There are several sub-issues that I expect will receive consideration and discussion during the yearlong study. Some of the issues expected to be discussed include the judicial system and the necessary balance of all the interests that are before the court in a capital punishment trial. Other issues should include the lengthy appeals process, the actual method of execution, and the issue of judicial activism by judges. Another concern that should be addressed is the "heavy hand of the state" in the prosecution of these cases. During the short time that I have served as a citizen legislator, I have learned quickly of the sometimes oppressive and tyrannical manner in which certain state agencies deal with our citizens. There is no question that our state has its share of "Wyatt Earps" in our state government agencies. An inquiry to review whether this imbalance in power that exists in certain select agencies also exists in the administration of Tennessee's capital punishment laws should be a primary issue that should be reviewed with a high standard of scrutiny. I have had the honor of serving our citizens alongside both Gov. Don Sundquist and Gov. Phil Bredesen, each of whom is an honorable man who has handled the issue of capital punishment with dignity, with the foremost consideration of the law, the facts of each case, and with a full understanding of his role as governor. I believe that both are good men who have been reflective as they have fulfilled their roles in the process and administration of Tennessee's capital punishment laws. It is my hope that this legislative committee will not be a rally of special interests either for or against the death penalty. I believe that a review of Tennessee's capital punishment system will provide assurances that the system works. If not, then perhaps we can identify the few aspects that are not operating efficiently and make any necessary changes as we balance the interests of our citizens, our state and the judicial process. (source : The Tennesean -- State Sen. Dewayne Bunch, R-Cleveland) ********************************* Panel has an important task in seeking fairness, reliability----Today's Topic: Death penalty gets a close look A special legislative study committee is scheduled to convene this afternoon and tomorrow at Legislative Plaza to consider one of the most important issues in Tennessee these days: the administration of the state's death penalty. While the General Assembly commissioned a death penalty study committee during its last session this past spring, the convening of the committee's 18 members could not come at a better time. Just last month, U.S. District Judge Aleta Trauger issued a ruling saying that Tennessee's new lethal injection procedures are unconstitutional because the procedure could pose a significant risk of "unnecessary pain.'' The judge's ruling stopped the scheduled Sept. 26 execution of Edward Jerome Harbison, who would have been put to death under the state's current guidelines. Last February, Gov. Phil Bredesen implemented a 90-day moratorium on executions so correction officials could rewrite the guidelines. That moratorium was lifted in May. On Sept. 7, state Attorney General Robert Cooper filed a motion in the U.S. 6th Circuit Court saying that the state plans to fight Trauger's ruling, which bars executions by lethal injection until the state addresses problems with training and medical expertise to ensure painless executions. The legislative study committee on the administration of the death penalty is about much more than lethal injections. Officials say they want the committee to: - Ensure a meaningful and comprehensive review by being fair, open and as thorough as possible. - Provide Tennesee with a great opportunity to address the serious flaws of its administration of the death penalty. In doing so, leaders believe it will improve the fairness and accuracy of Tennessee's capital punishment system. - Show that history dictates the need for a complete and thorough review of Tennessee's death penalty system. Previous reviews consistently found significant flaws in the state's administration of capital punishment. - Make sure a fair and accurate criminal justice system is in the best interest of all Tennesseans. "Our main interest is to clarify the use of the death penalty for defendants with severe mental illness,'' said Sita Diehl, executive director of the Tennessee chapter of the National Alliance on Mental Illness and a member of the study committee. There will be other issues considered as well, and all of them must be seen as important. Tom Sullivan, a former prosecutor and a partner with the Chicago law firm of Jenner & Block, and who served as a co-chairman of the Illinois Ryan Commission that studied Illinois' death penalty system from 2000 to 2002, said the main objective there was to make the death penalty system more accurate, fair and just. That should be the main goal in Tennessee. Last week, the American Bar Association released a report saying that Pennsylvania's death penalty system - from crime scene to courtroom to clemency - has flaws that are so pervasive that the state risks executing an innocent person. Over the years, this newspaper has spoken out against the death penalty but, if the state is going to have such a system, it must definitely make sure no flaws exist. That is one of the most horrible things that could ever happen. (source: Opinion, The Tennessean) ********************************************************** Reader Views The best way Tennessee could improve the death penalty system is to use it or lose it. The death penalty merry-go-round has grown tiresome. Here's how our current system works: Some killer is sentenced to the death penalty. He sits in prison for a number of years while his lawyer goes through all the appeals process so he won't be executed. Then, the condemned man or woman decides he or she actually wants to be executed. After this all the bleeding heart anti-death penalty people start their protesting. The day comes for the execution and then the killer doesn't want to die. The execution time gets closer and closer. Then, at the last minute the execution is usually stopped and we the taxpayers will continue to pay for this person for the rest of his or her life. Many of those on death row right now have been there for years. The state of Tennessee should make a decision. Either do completely away with the death penalty or use it and save all of us the trauma of this never-ending soap opera. Tim Oliphant Lewisburg 37091 -- The death penalty? "Many who live deserve death. Many who die deserve life. Can you give it to them?" (Tolkein) Sarena Egan Nashville 37205 Ideally, Tennessee's (and every) death penalty system should be improved by abolishing it entirely. As a society, the USA claims to be for human rights, but chooses to allow one of the most basic of human rights (life) to be casually dismissed in the name of justice. Given the reality that we have a death penalty system, there are numerous things that can be done to improve the apparently necessary evil that exists. First, truly listen to the best practices that are available. The media reports of the recent death penalty protocols review suggest that we currently aren't listening to ideas outside our comfort zone. Second, get rid of the spectacle nature of this aspect of punishment in the justice system. I don't believe we have victim witnesses or media as people undergo intake for lifetime imprisonment. Why do we have victim witnesses and media present for executions? Third, let's begin an objective conversation about this portion of our justice system. Emotional decisions surrounding actual executions are not beneficial to the overall good of society. Let's hear from victim families against execution throughout the year. Killing people to demonstrate that killing people is wrong isn't right. Todd Liebergen Madison 37115 ---- You keep hearing these death penalty opponents yelling that lethal injection in barbaric. They say that death row inmates feel pain but can't express it. How do they know this? Have they had a human volunteer be injected with the appropriate amounts of the anesthetic and then be brought back and say they knew everything going on around them? A federal judge says that lethal injection is inhumane, so it's cruel and unusual punishment. What about the victims in the cases where death row inmates were convicted? Where is their justice of inhumane treatment given to them? These victims never got a stay in their death to live on. What is the difference? With lethal injection, they just go to sleep and die, not dying a horrific death as the victims did. Some have asked, why not execute a person in the manner as they killed? Others say execute them or give them life without parole. How do you think victims feel during torture? If they knew they were going to die, don't you think they would want it peaceful? That is lethal injection in a nutshell. J.G. Mills Nashville 37209 -- With all due respect, the bickering of proponents and opponents of the death penalty has grown almost unbearable. I am not trying to minimize the sincerity of both Stacy Rector and Verna Wyatt, but the points they raise of racism, cost, and deterrence skirt around the heart of the issues. There are harder questions to answer. I cannot help but wonder what the numbers would tell us if we looked beyond the 100 people facing what we have come to refer to as the death penalty. My estimate is that more than 2,000 people have been sentenced to either life without parole or more years than they will possibly live to serve. In other words, they've been sentenced to death. Cost, race, and deterrence studies need to factor in this kind of death penalty as well. Does life without parole deter murder as effectively as death? How many of these terminally sentenced inmates hold full-time jobs that defer the cost of their incarceration? Have we repaired the glaring racial injustices of the past, or simply masked them with social class? I want to see studies that examine costs to society, instead of costs to the state. I want to hear from the families of the convicted who are undoubtedly as impacted as the families of the victims. Which kind of death sentence is harder on them? People change, and so do laws. Given the increased security of our prisons and the knowledge we have gained on rehabilitation even in the most dire situations, can we face the truth about the actual number of men and women facing death in Tennessee's prisons? Some of these people make amazing contributions to their communities. If we consider a slightly bigger picture, does this debate make sense? Ann Charvat, Ph.D., C.S.P Nashville 37212 (source: The Tennessean NEBRASKA: Retired FBI agent to speak at UNK----The Grand Island Independent A retired FBI special agent who helped establish criminal profiling as an investigative tool will discuss his case files with the public at 7 p.m. Tuesday in the Ponderosa Room of the University of Nebraska at Kearney Student Union. John Douglas, former chief of the FBI Investigative Support Unit, is considered by many experts as the world's leading authority on criminal profiling. His evening presentation, free and open to the public, will cover details of the most notorious serial killers and criminals of our time, including Charles Manson, Sirhan Sirhan, John Wayne Gacy, David Berkowitz (Son of Sam) and James Earl Ray. Douglas has written seven books detailing his work and continues to consult with law enforcement agencies, victims and judicial and correctional officials throughout the world. Douglas was a consultant for the film "The Silence of the Lambs." He is an expert at examining crime scene behavior and creating profiles of the perpetrators. Such work has become a valuable tool in making arrests of serial criminals, and successfully interrogating and prosecuting offenders. "I'm extremely proud of my work," Douglas said. "As an FBI agent, I hunted some of the most vicious predators in American history, including the Atlanta child murderer, the Green River Killer and San Francisco's Trailside Killer." "Profiling was in its infancy when I got started. It was an exciting, emerging science with a lot of skeptics and much work yet to be done," Douglas said. "I learned as I went, conducting face-to-face interviews with Ed Kemper, Charles Manson, David Berkowitz, Richard Speck and many violent serial criminals whose single positive contribution to society was the window they gave me and my colleagues into the criminal mind," he said. "By talking with and observing them, we learned how they thought, from the escalation of their violent acts to victim selection," Douglas said. "We learned how to predict their behavior. Most importantly, we learned how they revealed themselves through their crimes. That's the basis of profiling." Douglas will speak that morning to UNK students, faculty and staff as part of the 19th Annual Criminal Justice Conference and Job Fair. The Department of Criminal Justice is part of UNK's Natural and Social Sciences College. The department prepares students for leadership in law enforcement, corrections and the courts. It offers 25 specific courses in criminal justice. Discussing the criminal justice system with UNK students from a different point of view will be John Terzano, president of the Justice Project, and Kirk Bloodsworth, program officer. Bloodsworth's criminal case became the first U.S. capital conviction to be overturned as a result of DNA testing. A former Marine and Maryland resident, he was convicted of 1st-degree murder and sentenced to death. After years of fighting for a DNA test, results indicated his DNA did not match any of the evidence received for testing. After 9 years in prison, 2 of which were spent on death row, he was released and pardoned by Maryland's governor. Subsequently, another individual was convicted of the murder based on a positive DNA match. The UNK event is sponsored by the UNK Loper Programming and Activities Council, an organization that brings prominent events to campus. (source: The Grand Island Independent) NEVADA----stay of impending execution Court stays Castillo execution The Nevada Supreme Court has issued a stay calling a halt to tonights scheduled execution of William Castillo. The stay was signed by all seven members of the court following a 90 minute hearing in which the ACLU argued it would be improper for Nevada to allow an exeuction by lethal injection when the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to consider whether that form of death might be unconstitutionally cruel. (source: Nevada Appeal) *************************** Last-minute court petitions seek to stop Nevada execution 2 groups trying to halt tonight's execution of William Castillo, facing a lethal injection for beating an elderly woman to death, have filed separate petitions to have the state Supreme Court block any executions in Nevada. The Nevada Coalition Against the Death Penalty sought to block Castillo's lethal injection by intervening in the case of another death row inmate, Pedro Rodriguez, who unlike Castillo doesn't want a lethal injection. The American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada sought a state high court order to block Castillo's execution pending the outcome of the U.S. Supreme Court's review of the lethal injection method used in many states to determine whether it's unconstitutional. Castillo has declined to file available appeals that would keep him alive. Rodriguez' execution is on hold pending outcome of his Nevada Supreme Court appeal which has raised the issue of the constitutionality of this state's lethal injection method. (source: The Associated Press) ********************************************************** He says he's ready; will he die tonight? By seeking an appeal, killer William Castillo could, at the last moment, halt his execution On Nevada's death row, Jimmy Neuschafer was the master of delays - and gastronomical gamesmanship. Twice Neuschafer told authorities he was giving up his appeals and was ready to die. In 1987 he was placed in the "last night cell" and ordered steak and lobster as his final meal. He then called his attorney to get a stay of execution. He used the same gambit in 1990, eating a final meal - and then having his attorney launch a new appeal. The warden vowed Neuschafer would not get a third last meal, but the condemned convict still managed to outmaneuver justice again - by dying in prison before he could be executed. Now, the state is preparing for the execution tonight of Las Vegas killer William Castillo, who would be the 13th man put to death since Nevada reinstated capital punishment in 1977. Castillo was convicted of the tire-iron slaying of 86-year old Isabelle Berndt in her Las Vegas home in November 1995. She was asleep when he entered the home, struck her with the tire iron, smothered her with a pillow and stole a VCR, money and silverware. Police later found the VCR and silverware at Castillo's apartment. Like Neuschafer, Castillo has told officials that he is abandoning his appeals - and has the power to call off the execution at the last minute. Castillo's attorney, however, says that scenario is unlikely, even though the recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment would guarantee him a stay. Late Friday, however, the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada and the Nevada Coalition Against the Death Penalty filed a motion with the Nevada Supreme Court seeking an immediate hearing on the constitutionality of the state's use of lethal injection as its method of execution. Although that request was filed on behalf of another inmate, Pedro Rodriguez, it could postpone Castillo's scheduled execution. During the past 3 decades, all but one of the dozen men executed in Nevada decided to drop his appeals. I witnessed 10 of those executions, as well as those of the last two men to die in the state's gas chamber. I will be sitting out tonight's execution. But if it proceeds, it likely will closely follow the script I've seen play out a dozen times, each admittedly with its own twists. Some of the condemned are repentant and offer apologies to their victims' relatives in their final moments. Others are defiant to the end. One donated his brain to medical science. And although most wear their prison denims when wheeled into the death chamber for the lethal injection, one killer wore a double-breasted Pierre Cardin suit to his execution at the Nevada State Prison. Jesse W. Bishop was the last person executed in the gas chamber, in October 1979, for the killing of a honeymooning man who tried to stop Bishop during his robbery of a Las Vegas casino. In a death row confession, he admitted he was the hired killer of as many as 18 people. Bishop vowed not to crack. And he never uttered a sound. But when the gas filled the chamber, he squirmed, twitched and rolled his head and eyes during the 10-minute ordeal. The 1st person executed by lethal injection in Nevada was Carroll E. Cole, who in interviews expressed concern about the possible pain. But he nonetheless wanted to proceed with his December 1985 execution. When the death drugs hit, his lips quivered, his eyes closed slowly and his stomach convulsed. 5 minutes later he was pronounced dead. It was Cole who donated his brain to science. Shortly after the death, neurosurgeon Lonnie Hammargren, who later became Nevada's lieutenant governor, removed Cole's brain to check for lesions, holes, cuts or signs of disease that might help explain the killer's rage. But the brain was normal, Hammargren said. During the past century and a half, Nevada has put 54 people to death. State Archivist Guy Rocha said between 1861 when the Nevada Territory was organized and 1903, executions by hanging were carried out by counties. A 1901 law required all executions to occur at the state prison. The 1st and only execution by shooting was on May 14, 1913, of Andriza Mirovich for a killing in Tonopah . In 1921 Nevada became the first state to move to execution by lethal gas. The 1983 Legislature changed the state's execution method to lethal injection. Under the current system, the inmate is strapped on his back to a gurney in the death chamber on the prison's 2nd floor. Medical technicians insert the tubes that will carry the deadly drugs to his body, and 2 prison staffers in another room use syringes to start the flow of drugs. Castillo is to receive a double dose of drugs "to make sure the person doesn't suffer," said Howard Skolnik, director of the state Corrections Department. The prisoner is given a sedative before the execution. If he refuses, Skolnik said that would be interpreted as a sign that he is having 2nd thoughts, and the execution would be halted. Once in the chamber, the inmate may stare at the ceiling, close his eyes or look through a large glass window at witnesses - victims' friends or relatives, his own relatives, public officials, prosecutors or reporters. Sometimes the prisoner nods at a witness he knows. Double murderer Sean Flanagan, who became a born-again Christian on death row, raised his head and turned toward the eight witnesses, which included his prosecutor, Dan Seaton. He mouthed the words, "You are a just man." He lay back down but then turned again to Seaton and said, "I love you." He then closed his eyes and died in June 1989. The April 2001 execution of Sebastian S. Bridges for shooting a man in Las Vegas was considerably less smooth and routine. He appeared calm at first when strapped into the gurney, but then he started crying and yelling, "You want to kill me like a dog." But he declined to request a stay. One of his final acts was to raise his head, look at the father of the man he had shot and yell, "This is murder." The father, Walt Blatchford, did not respond and said later he felt little emotion over Bridges' last moments alive. 8 official witnesses and news media representatives will be present at today's scheduled execution. Members of the victim's family may be present. Castillo's family was allowed a last visit Sunday and will have telephone contact with him on his final day. As always, a federal public defender will be on hand. If Castillo changes his mind, the defender, using a telephone only feet from the death chamber, will ask a judge on call to issue a stay. Over the years, the executions have been scheduled at various hours - 2 a.m., 6 a.m., 8 p.m. This one is set for 8:30 p.m. At 4 p.m. Castillo will receive his final meal. At the appointed hour, after Castillo is strapped to the gurney, Skolnik will ask Castillo one final time whether he wants to call off the execution. If Castillo wants to proceed, he will receive sodium pentathol as a tranquilizer, followed by succinylcholine to paralyze him and potassium chloride, which will stop his heart. Skolnik has rejected interviews for the 35-year-old Castillo, saying he wants to keep the emotional event as low key as possible, in part because of the strain executions place on prison staffers. "I don't want to turn this into a circus," he said. Death penalty opponents, however, are determined that the most severe punishment that society can impose not be allowed to transpire without notice. Outside the prison, several dozen people typically gather in a candlelight vigil, a scene that will be repeated tonight. "People of any faith or nonfaith can gather and be a witness to the barbarity of this," said Nancy Hart, president of the Nevada Coalition Against the Death Penalty. (source: Cy Ryan, Las Vegas Sun) ************************************************* The Truckee Meadows Weighs In On Capital Punishment Convicted killer William Castillo is scheduled to die by lethal injection in Carson City on Monday night. Many people in the Truckee Meadows are unaware of the specifics of Castillo's case, but it's definitely not keeping them from expressing their opinions. "I think it gives the wrong message," says Robert Fletcher. "And it's mostly about revenge" A ruling by a federal judge is requiring the state to publicize the execution protocol, which will likely only fuel a widely debated issue. (source: KOLO News) ARIZONA: Court rejects appeal by 30-year death row inmate The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected an appeal by an Arizona prisoner who said his execution would violate the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment because he has been on death row for more than 30 years. Over the dissent of one justice, the high court turned down the appeal by Joe Clarence Smith, who contended that standards of decency in the United States make it unconstitutional to execute an individual held on death row for such a long time. Smith's attorneys said he is one of the longest serving death row inmates in the country, after awaiting execution for almost 3 times as long as the average death row inmate. The authors of the U.S. Constitution did not envision imprisoning someone for 3 decades before they were put to death, they argued. "Nor would Smith's execution after such an outrageous delay additionally serve the societal interest of retribution and deterrence," they said. Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard opposed the appeal. The fact that Smith first received death sentences for two murders some 30 years ago does not violate the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment, Goddard said. The delay stemmed from Smith litigating claims related to his case in state and federal courts. Smith was first sentenced to death in 1977. After successfully appealing and being allowed to present new evidence at another sentencing hearing 2 years later, he again received the death penalty. In 1999, a U.S. appeals court overturned Smith's death sentence on the grounds that his lawyer had been ineffective during the 2nd sentencing hearing. The third sentencing proceeding took place in 2004, when Smith got the death penalty. Justice Stephen Breyer dissented. "In my view, Smith can reasonably claim that his execution at this late date would be 'unusual,'" Breyer wrote. "I am unaware of other executions that have taken place after so long a delay, particularly when much of the delay at issue seems due to constitutionally defective sentencing proceedings." Breyer also said the issue of whether it is cruel to keep an individual on death row for decades, under threat of imminent execution, raises a serious constitutional question. (source: Reuters)
[Deathpenalty] death penalty news-----TENN., NEB., NEV., ARIZ.
Rick Halperin Mon, 15 Oct 2007 22:01:26 -0500 (Central Daylight Time)
