May 12
TEXAS:
State, Lawyers Debate Identifying Execution Drug Supplier
Revealing Texas' supplier of execution drugs could have a harmful effect on the
provider and as a result leave the state empty-handed, a lawyer for the state
suggested Wednesday during an appeals court hearing.
State Deputy Solicitor General Matthew Frederick told a 3-judge panel on the
Austin-based 3rd Court of Appeals that a "substantial risk" comes with naming
the state's supplier. Specifically, he said, people who are against the death
penalty might lash out against the supplier.
"Pharmacies don't have security details," Frederick said. "Their only
protection is anonymity."
But 3 lawyers who have filed suit to release the identity of lethal injection
drug suppliers say that no "substantial threat of physical harm" exists;
therefore, the information legally cannot be withheld, their attorney, Philip
Durst, argued.
The appeals court had challenged attorneys for the Texas Department of Criminal
Justice and the group of 3 lawyers - who have represented clients on death row
- to differentiate between risks and threats when explaining what the harm is
in identifying a compounding pharmacy that has provided the state with lethal
injection drugs. The court did not offer a timeline for when it would make a
ruling, but either party could appeal a future ruling to the Texas Supreme
Court.
The 3 lawyers sued the Texas Department of Criminal Justice in 2014 after the
agency refused a request to identify the compounding pharmacy that supplies the
state with lethal injection drugs. The attorneys - Maurie Levin, Naomi Terr and
Hilary Sheard - had made the request through the state's Public Information
Act.
A state district court later that year ordered the prison agency to release the
pharmacy's identity because it was public information, but the agency appealed.
Since then, major pharmaceutical companies have refused to supply capital
punishment states with the drugs needed to execute the condemned, forcing Texas
to scramble and find alternative providers. In 2015, Texas made it legal to
conceal the identity of parties that supply lethal injection drugs to the
state.
As a result, the attorneys are challenging the Department of Criminal Justice
to release the identity of lethal injection drug suppliers from before the law
went into effect last September.
The 3 lawyers say that identifying lethal injection drug providers makes it
easier to hold them accountable. But the state argues that releasing that
information could lead to physical harm of its supplier. There may be risk, but
there is no sign of an imminent threat, attorneys for both sides acknowledged
before the appeals court.
Justice Bob Pemberton pushed back Wednesday on the state's "substantial risk"
characterization, saying that there is a difference between a risk and a
threat, and that individuals such as former Gov. Rick Perry have been vocal
about their position on capital punishment, which hasn't led to threats being
realized. A pharmacy supplier is a soft target, though, Frederick responded.
Also, Frederick referenced the 2013 revelation that the Woodlands Compounding
Pharmacy supplied the state with execution drugs led to significant amounts
hate mail and messages. As providers have been identified over the years, they
have stopped making the drugs, according to multiple media reports.
Equating people who oppose the death penalty to anti-abortion activists, Durst
said that such activists generally protest peacefully. There's never been
anything other than "How could you?" and other responses protected by the First
Amendment, he said.
The judges also asked how allowing the supplier's identity to remain secret
because of safety concerns would not gut the state's Public Information Act.
Frederick said that keeping the identity secret falls in line with the physical
safety exemption from complying with a public information request. Durst said
that labeling someone or something a threat should be based on concrete
evidence. Theories from experts alone is not enough, he said.
"It can't be that," Durst told the panel.
Until a few years ago, major pharmaceutical companies provided execution drugs
to death penalty states, Frederick said. As soon as smaller companies are
identified, they might leave the market, he said.
"They don't want to stick around long enough to see what happens," he said.
After the larger companies dropped death penalty states as clients, Texas began
seeking alternative providers to make the lethal drugs, but the federal
government has weighed in on a couple of occasions.
In April, the Food and Drug Administration barred the Texas Department of
Criminal Justice from importing sodium thiopental, a drug used in executions.
Last year, Texas and Arizona reportedly tried to import execution drugs from
India but were unsuccessful.
(source: Texas Tribune)
FLORIDA:
Death penalty challenge rational
Florida's death penalty law is in limbo once again. A Miami-Dade judge ruled
Monday that a jury must vote unanimously in order to invoke the death penalty.
In January, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the legality of the penalty phase
of murder trials in Florida, ruling that juries, not judges, had the final say
in doling out a lethal injection.
The state legislature rewrote the law, to reflect the ruling. But the new law
read that a 10 of 12 majority was necessary to do so. The high court did not
rule on the unanimity issue in January.
Back to Monday's ruling, involving a defendant awaiting trial on a 1st-degree
murder charge. It challenged the state's new law, charging that the jury
recommendation must be unanimous. Currently only Florida and Alabama do not
require unanimity in a death penalty.
Circuit Judge Milton Hirsch based the ruling on the Florida Constitution and
common law, not federal requirements.
In it he made thoughtful points. Among them:
-- That the public will support a verdict based on the notion that the jury
has spoken. But not in cases "as to which the most that can be said is that
some jurors have spoken."
-- That a verdict is a jury's pronouncement, not 12 separate announcements.
-- That the process of mandating a unanimous verdict of guilt, but not of the
penalty for it, is non-sequitur.
He wrote: "A decedent cannot be more or less dead. An expectant mother cannot
be more or less pregnant. And a jury cannot be more or less unanimous. Every
verdict in every criminal case in Florida requires the concurrence, not of
some, not of most, but of all jurors - every single one of them."
What this will likely mean is the legislature will go back to square one in
January and require the unanimous death penalty recommendation. That could very
well trigger sentence reduction of death to life in prison for the state's 390
death row inmates.
This will be painful for many families of the victims of these convicted
killers.
What it does not mean is that the death penalty is overturned in Florida.
Juries will simply bear the same burden in executing a defendant as in
convicting one.
Florida has the highest count of death penalty exonerations in the country, at
23.
Hirsch concluded "We will take no Floridian's liberty upon a
less-than-unanimous verdict, although liberty taken today can be restored
tomorrow. We dare take no Floridian's life upon a less than-unanimous verdict.
The life taken today can never be restored."
We can think of few arguments to counter his rationale.
(source: Editorial, St. Augustine Record)
***********************
Forget the fixes, get rid of executions
The Florida Legislature should get the message about the death penalty.
It's not that lawmakers haven't tried to fix our flawed system of execution.
But fearful of appearing soft on crime, they refuse to do what makes sense.
Given the extraordinary costs of capital cases, the state's track record of
getting it wrong and the reality that life without parole is its own cruel
punishment, abolishing the death penalty is the best solution.
Absent that, lawmakers should fix the process to require a unanimous jury
verdict for sentencing someone to death. For defending the indefensible is
costly and misguided.
Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court said Florida's process for imposing
the death penalty was unconstitutional because judges, rather than juries, made
the final call.
So this spring, lawmakers changed the law to require that juries make the final
decision, not simply a recommendation. And though the justices said nothing
about Florida's refusal to require that the jury be unanimous, lawmakers
decided to tinker with that part of the law, too.
After much debate, they agreed to require that to impose the ultimate sentence,
10 of 12 jurors must agree. Previously, only a 7-5 simple majority was needed.
However, this week Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Milton Hirsch became the 1st
Florida judge to declare that failing to require a unanimous jury verdict is
unconstitutional.
Hirsch's ruling is welcome and right. After all, we require a unanimous verdict
to convict someone of murder, robbery and other crimes. Why require less when
sentencing someone to die?
Every other state except for Alabama and Delaware require a unanimous jury
verdict for the death penalty.
But you can be certain taxpayers will fund another lengthy legal battle, given
that prosecutors are expected to appeal. Stephen Harper, co-director of the
Florida Center for Capital Representation at Florida International University's
College of Law, says it's possible Florida's new law will wind up before the
U.S. Supreme Court.
Haven't we had enough of death penalty fixes and court battles and attorney
fees and delays while lawyers fight over execution methods?
Nineteen states have abolished the death penalty. Last year, Nebraska became
the first conservative state in several decades to do so. It's time Florida did
the same.
Florida already has a death penalty reputation that won't be easily shed. More
inmates have been executed on Gov. Rick Scott's watch - 23 - than any previous
governor. Tragically, Florida leads the nation with 26 death row exonerations,
meaning we've gotten it wrong 26 times. And almost 400 inmates currently on
Florida's death row are waiting to see what the high court's last ruling means
to them, so expect more huge legal costs.
As more states rid themselves of the death penalty - 7 in the last decade -
they're also executing fewer people. And research by Harper and others finds
there is no correlation between abolishing the death penalty and any rise in
violent crime.
Life in prison has proven to be less expensive than the years-long legal
process it takes for an execution. And you can make the argument that life in
prison without parole could be easier on families, allowing them to get on with
their lives and sparing them years of hearings and appeals.
Florida has created too many fixes and too many mistakes with the death
penalty. The sooner we get rid of it, the better.
(source: Editorial, Sun-Sentinel)
ALABAMA----impending execution
Alabama prepares to execute man for killing police officer
Alabama is preparing to execute a man convicted in the 1985 killing of a police
officer.
Vernon Madison is scheduled to be executed by lethal injection at 6 p.m.
Thursday at the state prison in Atmore.
Madison was convicted of killing Mobile police Officer Julius Schulte. Schulte
had responded to a domestic call involving Madison. Prosecutors said Madison
crept up and shot Schulte in the back of the head as he sat in his police car.
A circuit court last month ruled Madison was competent to be executed despite a
decline in his cognitive abilities after a stroke.
Madison would be the 2nd inmate executed in Alabama this year.
(source: Associated Press)
*****************
Who is Vernon Madison? Alabama cop-killer facing execution has claimed
insanity, incompetence
Vernon Madison, 65, has spent nearly 1/2 of his life on Alabama's death row
after being convicted of killing a Mobile police officer. The state of Alabama
plans to execute him on Thursday at 6 p.m. at Holman Correctional Facility in
Atmore.
Madison is represented by the Equal Justice Initiative, a Montgomery-based
nonprofit law firm that primarily represents prisoners and the poor.
EJI attorneys argue that Madison should not be executed for several reasons: a
judge overrode the jury's recommendation of life without parole and sentenced
him to death, and several strokes and dementia have left him unable to
rationally understand why the state seeks to execute him.
So far, several judges have rejected arguments that Madison is incompetent to
be executed.
Madison's attorneys have appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh
Circuit. They also have requested a stay of execution from the Alabama Supreme
Court based on two recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings that have "raised
fundamental questions about the constitutionality of the use of judicial
override in Alabama."
Greene, who recovered from her injuries, later testified that there had been
"increased tension" between her and Madison. She said Schulte hadn't pulled a
gun or threatened Madison.
"Vernon had been for several weeks in a very agitated state," she said during a
1985 hearing. "He was not communicating well with me at that point, or with
anyone. He seemed angry about everything. Vernon's sister was murdered Feb. 26.
She was buried a week later. From that point on he remained agitated. He was
not acting rationally anymore."
Madison had three prior convictions in Mississippi: robbery in May 1971,
assault in June 1973 and assault in July 1977, according to news reports.
After 14 years in prison in Mississippi, he had been paroled, partially through
the efforts of John Langham, a former Prichard city councilman and business
owner who knew Madison's mother.
"Something had to push that boy to that," Langham told the Press Register in
1985. "He wanted to stay out of trouble."
At a hearing in July 1985, Madison entered a plea claiming his innocence and
wrote a letter to the court saying his civil rights were being violated.
"I am of poverty, but I'm not without knowledge of the law," he wrote. "I am
denied the use of the law library here and I'm also deprived of privileges in
which all county inmates enjoy while confined in jail."
A psychiatrist who evaluated him said he continually displayed antagonism
toward doctors and nurses, who said he refused to clean his cell and turned
down jail food in favor of candy bars and chips.
Madison later amended his plea to guilty by reason of insanity. Defense
attorneys said that he received psychiatric assistance at least 33 times while
incarcerated in Mississippi. A prison psychiatrist previously had determined
that Madison suffered from "a paranoid illness of profound proportion."
Madison's first trial took place in September 1985 before Mobile County Circuit
Judge Ferrill McRae. Prosecutors presented several witnesses from the night
Schulte was killed. Defense attorneys contended that Madison was emotionally
unstable when the incident occurred, and a psychiatrist testified that he
suffered from mixed personality paranoid disorder and antisocial disorder.
He was convicted, but a state appellate court sent the case back for a
violation involving race-based jury selection.
His second trial took place in 1990. Prosecutors presented a similar case, and
defense attorneys again argued that Madison suffered from a mental illness.
They did not dispute the fact that Madison shot Schulte, but said he did not
know that Schulte - dressed in plain clothes and driving an unmarked police
cruiser - was a police officer.
He was again convicted, and a jury recommended a death sentence by a 10-2 vote.
"The murder of Julius Schulte was a pitiless and totally amoral act committed
by a man whose life history is but 1 sequel after another of violent,
assaultive acts against other human beings and total disregard for our laws and
those who are charged with enforcing them," McRae said when sentencing Madison
to death in November 1990.
At the sentencing hearing, Madison's attorney read a 3-page handwritten
statement from Madison in which he maintained his innocence.
"I've sat meekly listening to the many lies told on me and the ugly things said
about me and none were true," Madison wrote. "I am not a murderer nor a hateful
or vindictive soul. I am not some wild beast nor am I insane. I am just as
intelligent as anyone among you."
An appellate court again sent the case back to Mobile County for a retrial,
this time based on improper testimony from an expert witness for the
prosecution.
Madison's 3rd and final trial took place in April 1994. He was convicted, and
the jury recommended a life sentence after both Madison and his mother, Aldonia
McMillan, asked for mercy.
McMillan broke down as she spoke to jurors, ''If you want to put him away, put
him away. I don't want to see my child die in the electric chair. He's the best
one I got and I'm the mother of 7 boys.''
Judge McRae, as in the previous 2 trials, chose to sentence Madison to death -
this time overriding the jury's recommendation.
In a 2011 interview with the New York Times, McRae addressed Alabama's practice
of judicial override.
"If you didn't have something like that," he told the newspaper. "A jury with
no experience in other cases would be making the ultimate decision, based on
nothing. The judge has seen many, many cases, not just one."
EJI notes that McRae overrode 6 jury recommendations for life without parole to
impose a death sentence, the most of any judge in Alabama. U.S. Supreme Court
Justice Sonia Sotomayor specifically cited McRae in a dissent over the state's
allowance of judicial override in capital cases.
"Alabama's capital sentencing scheme has exactly the same defect that the
Supreme Court declared unconstitutional earlier this year in Hurst v. Florida,"
according to an EJI news release.
Their request for a stay pending before the Alabama Supreme Court is based on a
potential challenge to the state's death penalty sentencing scheme in light of
the Hurst decision.
Incompetent to be executed?
A state circuit court judge on April 29 denied a request for a stay of
execution, based on testimony and arguments offered during a competency hearing
earlier that month. On Tuesday, a federal judge agreed with the state judge's
ruling, paving the way for the execution to go forward.
"It is unconstitutional to execute an individual who is mentally incompetent,"
an EJI news release stated. "Despite evidence that Mr. Madison is incompetent,
a federal judge denied his request for a stay of execution late [Tuesday]."
Madison has suffered several strokes, which, coupled with diabetes,
hypertension and debilitating headaches, have led to significant cognitive
decline. His speech is slurred, he is legally blind and he can no longer walk
independently.
According to court documents, Madison most recently was found unresponsive in
his prison cell in January. Doctors determined he had suffered a stroke that
resulted in retrograde amnesia, leading to an inability to independently
recollect the offense of which he was convicted.
"Mr. Madison could not recall any of the 25 elements in a brief story vignette
[a psychologist] read him, could not remember the alphabet past the letter G,
could not perform serial three additions, could not remember the name of the
previous United States President, named Guy Hunt as the governor of Alabama,
and could not remember the name of the Warden at Holman Correctional Facility,"
EJI attorneys have written in motions seeking to halt the execution.
Over the past few months, his attorneys say he has become less lucid, more
disoriented and increasingly disheveled.
(source: al.com)
LOUISIANA:
Documents reveal allegations of evidence being left out in Darrell James
Robinson death penalty trial
We are learning more about new developments in the case against Darrell James
Robinson. Robinson was convicted and sentenced to death for the 1996 quadruple
murder of a family in Poland, Louisiana. Among the dead was an infant.
On Monday, a motion to vacate the conviction and death sentence was submitted
in the Rapides Parish courthouse by Robinson's attorneys to Judge Patricia
Koch. It was a move that district attorney's office never objected to. On
Wednesday, we got an explanation why.
Attorneys for Robinson allege that evidence was withheld from Robinson's
original defense attorney, Mike Small. It's evidence they believe could have
led to an acquittal at the time of the trial.
On Monday, 2 attorneys representing Robinson, as well as, current District
Attorney Phillip Terrell and Assistant District Attorney Greg Wampler agreed to
a "joint stipulation of facts."
Inside the document is an agreement that said Small never had access to key
pieces of evidence including photographs of physical evidence taken at the
crime scene and at the crime lab, as well as scene sketches and ballistics
bench notes.
"Those stipulations were based upon things that were told to us and Mr.
Robinson's lawyers by Mr. Small and Mr. Shannon," said Terrell. "Obviously, Mr.
Shannon is still employed here. I assume because my assistant district attorney
tells me that all of those things are true, so I assume they are."
However, the signature of Mike Shannon, the prosecutor during the trial and
co-counsel now was left off the joint stipulation agreement signed Monday. Yet
Terrell said Shannon helped draft the stipulations.
"In fact, if you notice on the stipulations, absolutely he was," explained
Terrell. "If you notice on there, there is some handwriting on there, those
were done based on assertions that Mr. Shannon made while we were talking about
the stipulations."
However, when asked why Shannon's name was not signed Terrell said "I...just
because he didn't. I don't know. We didn't put it on there."
If Judge Koch approves that agreement, it could pave the way for a motion to
vacate Robinson's conviction and sentence to be granted. Yet Terrell said they
are filing a motion on the matter for an official hearing to take place
mid-July.
"We certainly oppose the motion to vacate and we're going to do everything we
can to make sure that the sentence stands," said Terrell.
We caught up with Sheriff William Earl Hilton to discuss these new
developments.
"The damn guy is guilty," said Sheriff Hilton. "He is as guilty as a human
being can get."
He said, Mike Shannon and those involved with the case followed the law when
prosecuting it.
"I have all of the confidence in the world in Mike Shannon," said Sheriff
Hilton. "I would like to see him prosecute this case again if it gets to that
point. i don't have any doubt about his capability."
Sheriff Hilton said if Robinson were to be released then he would most likely
kill again.
"It's very, very possible," insisted Sheriff Hilton. "I know some things about
him that I'm not privy to reveal. But, he is a weird, weird individual."
(source: KALB news)
OHIO:
Death Penalty Arguments to Begin for Convicted Killer of 3
The troubled background of an Ohio man who killed 3 women, including reports of
childhood beatings and malnourishment, likely will frame arguments that his
life be spared.
Defense attorneys are scheduled to begin making arguments Thursday against a
death sentence for Michael Madison.
Madison, 38, was convicted last week in a Cleveland courtroom of aggravated
murder and kidnapping, charges that include death penalty specifications.
Prosecutors said Madison deserves to die for murdering 38-year-old Angela
Deskins, 28-year-old Shetisha Sheeley and 18-year-old Shirellda Terry, whose
bodies were found in July 2013 wrapped in garbage bags near the East Cleveland
apartment building where Madison lived. A medical examiner ruled that Deskins
and Sheeley were strangled, but couldn't determine how Terry died.
Authorities said Madison confessed to killing 2 of the women after his arrest,
but couldn't recall having killed the third. His attorneys conceded at trial
that he had killed the women.
The same jury that convicted Madison now will decide his fate, with the judge
having the final say. In Ohio, a judge can reject a death sentence, but can't
impose one if a jury doesn't vote for it.
If appeals court documents are any indication, Madison's attorneys will argue
that he suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder resulting from abuse when
he was a young child.
Madison was beaten by his mother and stepfather during the early 1980s when he
was around 3 or 4 years old, according to a summary of an investigative report
prepared by the Cuyahoga County Department of Children and Family Services.
An investigation found that Madison's mother beat him with a cord, picked him
up by his hair and gave him a black eye. He also was malnourished. The report
said his stepfather beat him for not picking up his toys, and he was sent to
live with his grandmother.
PTSD is a recognized mental disorder with a long list of criteria for a
qualified diagnosis, some of which are subjective, according to Cleveland-based
forensic psychiatrist Sara West. Jurors must decide the significance of the
disorder if PTSD is one of the facts Madison's attorneys present in favor of
sparing him.
"It's not a psychotic disorder," West said. "It doesn't alter one's perception
of reality."
A doctor in 2010 diagnosed Madison with depression, sleep disturbance and
anxiety. His attorneys have said he has drug and alcohol dependence.
Those convicted of crimes punishable by death often face long odds at
sentencing, said University of Dayton law professor Lori Shaw. Jurors have
already indicated that they're not opposed to the death penalty and, as in the
Madison case, have seen and heard grisly testimony about horrific killings,
Shaw said.
Even if Madison is sentenced to die, an execution would be years off. The state
currently doesn't have execution drugs and the Supreme Court already has
scheduled more than 2 dozen executions into 2019.
(source: Associated Press)
_______________________________________________
A service courtesy of Washburn University School of Law www.washburnlaw.edu
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Unsubscribe: http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/options/deathpenalty
